Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
It's ambiguous with path-rootless, no?
vkg> I don't think so. I don't think you can generate a token with
vkg> "[" and "]" using the path-rootless production rule (unless
vkg> they are escaped.)
Right, but I meant it's ambiguous when it's NOT an IPv6 address.
Which will probably be a lot of the time. :)
Also, I don't really understand what the semantics means for
"authority" vs. "path-rootless" in that RFC as defined. What does an
app do differently in those two cases?
OK, I see what you mean, and I am not sure I have a good
answer, either.
Presumably we (i.e., the SIP WG) can provide a statement
on why we think that rfc3986 should be changed, and how it
can be changed, but here is a (hopefully small) list of
potential questions and side-effects we don't have an answer
to.
Then have someone in the right authority arbitrate the ABNF
fix.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60566 (USA)
Email: v...@{alcatel-lucent.com,bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/
_______________________________________________
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
