Aah. That makes sense. On September 30, 2016 2:34:29 PM EDT, Roman Shpount <ro...@telurix.com> wrote: >On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Alex Balashov ><abalas...@evaristesys.com> >wrote: > >> Yeah, but as I understand it, the spec is more explicit on arbitrary >> parameters in the Route set than in Via. >> >> Route is where I'd expect the state to go in this case, too—it's >where all >> other state goes. But the implementors went with custom Via >parameters >> instead. > > >The issue is that responses to SIP request (especially error responses >to >the dialog creating INVITE) do not always contain Route or Record-Route >headers. The only way to store application specific data which is >needed to >forward such SIP responses is in the Via generic parameter. > >Regards, >_____________ >Roman Shpount
-- Alex -- Principal, Evariste Systems LLC (www.evaristesys.com) Sent from my Google Nexus. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
