On 8/4/22 11:09 AM, Rakesh wrote:
Hi Paul,

Thanks for your response.
Quoting your statement "But it makes no sense to send this unless there was a matching prior sip request with the same sip URI."

If I understood correctly the earlier request prior to CANCEL is normally a sip INVITE. And in case of INVITE has been sent with the such format in FROM header then further requests like CANCEL can send it else not.

Do we have any reference on RFC that any SIP entity should not send sip From header as like on CANCEL if INVITE has not sent with that way?

Spend some time understanding section 9 of RFC 3261.

It doesn't say it is incorrect to send a CANCEL without a prior matching request. But it specifies what the receiver of the CANCEL should do - that it should send a 481 response.

From what little you have said about the situation it sounds like this may have been sent as part of a test. If so the sender may intentionally be generating error cases to see if your implementation responds to them as it should.

        Thanks,
        Paul

BR///Rakesh

On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 8:24 PM Paul Kyzivat <pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu <mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu>> wrote:

    On 8/4/22 8:11 AM, Rakesh wrote:
     > Hi Team,
     >
     > I could see in a sip CANCEL message From Header as below
     >
     > From: "test" <sip:ims.test.in
    <http://ims.test.in>>;tag=3bbb9483d215d830c635372f8f181929
     >
     > is this correct?

    Just looking at this, without regard for context, it is valid syntax.
    (The userinfo portion of the sip URI is optional.)

    But it makes no sense to send this unless there was a matching prior
    sip
    request with the same sip URI.

    Each domain is free to define the userinfo portion of its sip URIs
    as it
    sees fit. This includes whether to support URIs with no userinfo. You
    might want to consult an administrator for ims.test.in
    <http://ims.test.in>.

             Thanks,
             Paul

     > Normally the From header is sip:user@domain
     >
     > As per ABNF grammar, the above one is also should not be an issue
    as From
     > header but could let me know if I misinterpreted the ABNF grammar?
     >
     > BR///Rakesh
     > _______________________________________________
     > Sip-implementors mailing list
     > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
    <mailto:Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu>
     > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
    <https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors>

    _______________________________________________
    Sip-implementors mailing list
    Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
    <mailto:Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu>
    https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
    <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

Reply via email to