2011/6/8 Paul Kyzivat <pkyzi...@cisco.com>: > IMO, I would treat problems with a URI in a topmost Route header the > same as a problem with the R-URI when there is no Route header. > (So I think 416 is appropriate for case (d).)
I think the same. IMHO 416 should not be specified just for the Request URI case. > The others don't seem to fit 416 or anything else very well. > So when in doubt, go with 400. Some existing proxies reply some custom 4XX codes for these kind of errors. I would like some specific and standarized 4XX response code, something like: 467 "Unsupported Transport" -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <i...@aliax.net> _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
