Subject: Re: [Sipping] RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sipping-service-examples-10.txt

From: Samuli Pöykkö <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 12:24:18 +0300

Alan Johnston wrote:

> The only normative reference which is not RFCed or protocol actioned is 
> cc-framework, so this draft is essentially complete and ready for WGLC.

Alan and folks,

I've been reading the Single Line Extension example rather literally and
there's one thing that probably needs your attention. I'm having hard
time understanding why the Contact header field value, in response F37
(page 123) containing isfocus feature parameter, is changed during
forwarding. The forwarded message F38 does not carry the isfocus feature
parameter and I could not find any reason for its omittance.

The message F37 is B3's response (200 OK) to B2's INVITE (with Join
header field) that is passed to the proxy with Contact header field

        Contact: <sips:[email-masked]>;isfocus

After forwarding, in the message F38, the header reads now

        Contact: <sips:[email-masked]>

and I'm wondering if this is intentional or perhaps a typing error,
should the header field value really change? I hope the case is not that
I've misunderstood something else, but would be grateful if anybody
could help me and potentially also other nitpicking readers to understand.

Thanks,
Samuli

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP