From: "Elwell, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   [JRE] But what about other parameters on the right hand side. For
   example, is
   tel:+123456789
   an alias for:
   sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED];user=phone;gr=abd76gd6  ?

   I don't think so.

   And is:
   sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED];user=phone;
   an alias for:
   sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED];user=phone;gr=abd76gd6  ?

   I don't think so

   And is:
   sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED];user=phone;gr=abd76gd6
   an alias for:
   sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED];user=phone;gr=abd76gd6  ?
   Possibly, assuming by routing the first one to provider.net it
   eventually gets changed to the latter and routed accordingly.

Personally, I agree with you that these URIs are all "different".  But
if we consider them to be different, any signing mechanism must
consider them to be different, and any transport mechanism must avoid
changing one of them into another.

Previously in this discussion, people have argued that SBCs are not
behaving incorrectly when they change one of these URIs into another,
and that thus any signing mechanism must tolerate such a substitution.

Dale
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.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

Reply via email to