At Fri, 27 Jul 2007 09:39:06 -0700, Michael Thomas wrote: > > Rohan Mahy wrote: > > Michael, > > > > At issue here is what the default implementor is likely to do. With a > > new 4xx, the misguided but well-meaning implementor is likely to try > > to "helpfully" "repair" the error without thinking about or > > understanding the security context. > > > > Using a Warning code raises the bar significantly, but still allows > > automata to at least log what happened. > As I said, a receiver is completely at liberty to prevent the downgrade > by not > accepting the downgraded request.
Unless, of course, someone is impersonating the receiver. > Problem solved by those who care. Regrettably no. -Ekr _______________________________________________ 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
