Subject: [Sipping] Reason header in Responses

From: "Jesske, R" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 11:24:13 +0200

Dear all,
Still the use of the Reason header confuses me.
With regard to the discussion of the retargeting draft the inclusion of a 486 in a 302 is discussed as possible.
But on the other side the inclusion of a Q.850 reason header in a response is not allowed.
Could I have some Guidance How I have to understand the following phrase written in RFC 3326 Reason Header:

   Initially, the Reason header field defined here appears to be most
   useful for BYE and CANCEL requests, but it can appear in any request
   within a dialog, in any CANCEL request and in any response whose
   status code explicitly allows the presence of this header field.

   Note that the Reason header field is usually not needed in responses
   because the status code and the reason phrase already provide
   sufficient information.

Does this mean that if I specify the use of SIP Reason in a response (e.G in a IETF RFC, ITU-T or ETSI Specification) it is allowed to use this now or do I need a special IETF draft to allow the use of Q.850 Reasons in responses?

Best Regards

Roland

Deutsche Telekom AG
T-Com Zentrale
Roland Jesske, TE332-2
Section TE33; Signalling, Gateways and Switching Systems 
 64307 Darmstadt, Germany
Phone:  +49 6151 83-5940 
Fax:      +49 6151 83-4577 
email:   [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
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

---

From: Dean Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:09:57 -0500

On Oct 18, 2005, at 4:24 AM, Jesske, R wrote:

> With regard to the discussion of the retargeting draft the  
> inclusion of a 486 in a 302 is discussed as possible.
> Could I have some Guidance How I have to understand the following  
> phrase written in RFC 3326 Reason Header:
>
> Does this mean that if I specify the use of SIP Reason in a  
> response (e.G in a IETF RFC, ITU-T or ETSI Specification) it is  
> allowed to use this now or do I need a special IETF draft to allow  
> the use of Q.850 Reasons in responses?

I'm sorry, Roland, but use of Q.850 codes in SIP responses would be  
"unreasonable" ;-), at least without an RFC that revises the response  
code to allow it to carry a Reason header. John submitted a draft  
that proposed extending 302 to carry a Reason header, and we haven't  
resolved on that approach. Even with such a draft, we'd also I  
believe need additional RFCs defining use of Q.850 codes in Reason  
headers, along with appropriate IANA actions.

--
Dean