Clarifications for when to use the name-addr production in SIP messages
draft-sparks-sipcore-name-addr-guidance-01

Document Type Replaced Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2016-09-27
Replaced by draft-ietf-sipcore-name-addr-guidance
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Expired & archived
plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state Replaced by draft-ietf-sipcore-name-addr-guidance
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-sparks-sipcore-name-addr-guidance-01.txt

Abstract

RFC3261 constrained several SIP header fields whose grammar contains the "name-addr / addr-spec" alternative to use name-addr when certain characters appear. Unfortunately it expressed the constraints with prose copied into each header field definition, and at least one header field was missed. Further, the constraint has not been copied into documents defining extension headers whose grammar contains the alternative. This document updates RFC3261 to state the constraint generically, and clarifies that the constraint applies to all SIP header fields where there is a choice between using name-addr or addr-spec. It also updates those extension SIP header fields that use the alternative to clarify that the constraint applies (RFCs 3325, 3515, 3892, 4508, 5002, 5318, 5360, and 5502).

Authors

Robert Sparks (rjsparks@nostrum.com)

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)