On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 08:31, Dale R. Worley <wor...@ariadne.com> wrote:
> Sreekanth <sknt...@gmail.com> writes: > > I am going through the SIP RFC (3261) and couldn't find anything > specified > > regarding the 401 Unauthorized challenge response from the UAS side > during > > a registration. > > > > I wanted to confirm whether it is okay to add a *Require *header into > this > > 401 Unauthorized message response. > > What would be the point? The concept of a Require header is "the UAS is > required to reject the request (420) if it doesn't understand the > option-tag". If a *response* had a Require header, either the UAC > understands the option-tag and processes the response as normal, or it > doesn't understand the option-tag ... and then what does it do? It > can't send a 420 response *to a response*. > > Dale > Dale, I'm trying to add a new feature in the existing REGISTER framework and the CPE will determine whether or not this new feature should get activated based on the 401 response from the Registrar server. If the Registrar server includes the Require header in the 401 response, then the CPE knows that this feature is supported by the Registrar. Currently, the Registrar does not need to respond to the REGISTER message with a 420 because of this: As per Section 10.3 Point 2, the Registrar MUST process the Require header field values as described in Section 8.2.2, which indicates that if there is an unsupported value/extension, the Registrar should ignore that and continue processing the message. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
