Subject: [Sip] Please note inconsistency in .txt and .ps/.pdf in bis-03

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 11:57:06 -0400

Folks,

Another inconsistency between the .txt and .ps/.pdf versions of bis has been
pointed out to me. The difference is in the section on URL comparison. The
.ps/.pdf says:

Thus, the following URLs are equivalent:
sip:juser@%65xample.com:5060
sip:[email-masked];Transport=udp
while
SIP:[email-masked];Transport=udp
sip:[email-masked];Transport=UDP

are not.

whilst the .txt says:

Thus, the following URLs are equivalent:

   sip:juser@
   sip:[email-masked];Transport=udp

   while

   SIP:[email-masked];Transport=udp
   sip:[email-masked];Transport=UDP

   are not.

The .txt has missed the stuff following the %65. This is some kind of latex
or compilation problem of sorts. To be clear, the hostport piece of the URL
is mandatory, and thus sip:juser@ is not even a valid SIP URL. The .pdf/.ps
is correct, the .txt is wrong.

I will get this fixed in -04. My aplogies.

-Jonathan R.

---
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                72 Eagle Rock Ave.
Chief Scientist                             First Floor
dynamicsoft                                 East Hanover, NJ 07936
[email-masked]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

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