2010/6/17 Brett Tate <[email protected]>: > For clarity, the use of diversion became a historic RFC this year since many > vendors use it: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5806
Thanks for pointing it out. What is the purpose of standarizing a new RFC with a similar meaning of an existing one (RFC 4244)? -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
