RFC 3325/3324. I don't think this scenario is directly mentioned, because it's silly, but it's valid according to the ABNF.
Joel Gerber Network Specialist Network Operations Eastlink E: joel.ger...@corp.eastlink.ca T: 519.786.1241 -----Original Message----- From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Rajesh Sent: July-02-14 12:30 PM To: abhishek verma; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Anonymous URI in SIP PAI header Thanks Abhishek. Could you please send me any references on this from RFCs and i would really appreciate if you can mention any scenario where we can see PAI header with anonymous URI Regards Rajesh On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 5:18 PM, abhishek verma <abhi2...@gmail.com> wrote: > It is valid > > > On Wednesday, 2 July 2014, Rajesh <rajcom...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> May i know whether it is valid to add Anonymous URI ( >> anonymous@anonymous.invalid) in the PAI (P-Asserted-Identity) header >> filed. >> Thanks >> >> Regards >> Rajesh >> _______________________________________________ >> Sip-implementors mailing list >> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors >> > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
