Yes, that has been added to the current working draft. But, it's not necessarily 302 (it could be 301 for example). And certain proxies may elect to just plainly reject it. That's all covered in the current working draft.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Spencer Dawkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 11:52 > To: Dean Willis; Attila Sipos > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Sorry found the answer (RE: [Sip] sips if > possible, sip if not. - a question on sip-sips-03 draft) > > Hi, Dean, > > > I wonder if it would be worth making an explicit suggestion in the > > SIPS that proxies provide a 302 if they receive a SIPS > request for an > > AOR for which they have only a SIP binding? We could also make a > > stronger recommendtation that if you don't know whether an AOR is > > SIPS or SIP you would try SIPS first and expect a 302 if you guess > > wrong. This could reduce the inclination for people to try > SIP first. > > This seems very helpful (perhaps even "required" - I don't > know how UACs know how to fall back without this type of guidance). > > Thanks, > > Spencer > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use > [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip > _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
