On Dec 10, 2008, at 1:30 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
I think your point is that we shouldn't explicitly point this out, for fear of people thinking they need to do it? So that rules out creating a new specific response code for it, and just letting 415 or 400 cover that case. (that's essentially what all the other SIP specs do too - don't mention it, leave it implementation specific) I don't see people having interop issues with it so that's fine, though it makes troubleshooting a bit more laborious.
I think I agree. -- Dean _______________________________________________ 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
