Subject: [sipcore] #28: UACs should add H-I if they implement it

From: "sipcore issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 17:48:37 -0000

#28: UACs should add H-I if they implement it
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  worley@…             |       Owner:            
     Type:  defect               |      Status:  new       
 Priority:  major                |   Milestone:  milestone1
Component:  rfc4244bis           |     Version:            
 Severity:  In WG Last Call      |    Keywords:            
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
 In section 4.1 is:

     Normally, UACs are not expected to include a History-Info header in an
 initial request as it is more of a Proxy function; the main reason it is
 allowed is for B2BUAs who are performing proxy-like functions such as
 routing.

 This is not a good idea; a UAC that wants History-Info should add the
 initial hi-entry.  The reason is that the UAC does not know that the next
 proxy that will modify the request-URI implements H-I; if the UAC does not
 provide an hi-entry, the UAS won't see the original request-URI.
 Conversely, adding "History-Info: <[request-URI]>;index=1" is not much
 more work than adding "Supported: histinfo", which we already assume the
 UAC will do.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/sipcore/trac/ticket/28>
sipcore <http://tools.ietf.org/sipcore/>