Subject: [Sip] Minor anomaly in RFC 3261 Registration example?

From: "Jain, Rajnish" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 17:06:05 -0500

Folks:

Not sure if this minor anomaly has been reported before and is already
logged in SIP bugzilla (which seems to be down right now). Apologies if
this is a repetition.

Section 10.3 of RFC 3261 states the following:

      8. The registrar returns a 200 (OK) response.  The response MUST
         contain Contact header field values enumerating all current
         bindings.  Each Contact value MUST feature an "expires"
         parameter indicating its expiration interval chosen by the
         registrar.  The response SHOULD include a Date header field.

Section 24.1 of RFC 3261 gives an example of 200 OK for a REGISTER as
the following:

        SIP/2.0 200 OK
        Via: SIP/2.0/UDP bobspc.biloxi.com:5060;branch=z9hG4bKnashds7
         ;received=192.0.2.4
        To: Bob <sip:[email-masked]>;tag=2493k59kd
        From: Bob <sip:[email-masked]>;tag=456248
        Call-ID: 843817637684230@998sdasdh09
        CSeq: 1826 REGISTER
        Contact: <sip:[email-masked]>
        Expires: 7200
        Content-Length: 0

The "expires" parameter in the 200 OK's Contact header is missing in
this example whereas it's a MUST in the text.

Thanks,
Rajnish

Email     mailto:[email-masked] 
SIP       sip:[email-masked]
PSTN      508-862-3215 
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://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

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 09:50:53 -0600

The bugzilla database is available at bugs.sipit.net.

RjS

On Jan 14, 2005, at 4:06 PM, Jain, Rajnish wrote:

> logged in SIP bugzilla (which seems to be down right now). Apologies 
> if this is a repetition.
>
>
>