Subject: RE: [Sip] Missing Call-ID header

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:43:10 -0500

If we needed to specify rules for handling every possible unusual failure
case, the spec would be much larger. Generally, when things break badly,
like a missing call-id, the handling is at the discretion of the
implementation, and there are no normative recommendations.

-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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gabriel Velo [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:46 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Sip] Missing Call-ID header
> 
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> I have a question regarding chapter 23.4.1
> the paragraph state that....
> 
> "The request could not be understood due to malformed syntax. The
> Reason-Phrase SHOULD identify the syntax problem in more detail, e.g.,
> "Missing Call-ID header". "
> 
> 
> Must a UA send a 400 response to a request that have missing mandatory
> headers ?
> If this is right , how a UA match this response to the corresponding
> request?.
> 
> Apologies if this has already been discussed.
> 
> thanks.
> Gabriel Velo.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list  http://www1.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
> 

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  http://www1.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