[sr-dev] IETF-RFCs and Diversion header

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello,

Inaki, I pinged you since you may be more familiar with procedures about 
all this IETF output, but maybe others here can provide useful 
information as well.

At this moment the parser in Kamailio for Diversion header considers it 
as with similar format as To header.

Diversion (defined in an *Historic* rfc5806) is obsoleted by 
History-Info(*Standard track* rfc4244). Its definition in rfc5806 is:

Diversion = "Diversion" ":" 1# (name-addr *( ";" diversion_params ))


and it is like To header. However, a newer *Informational* rfc6044, 
redefines Diversion as:

Diversion = "Diversion" HCOLON diversion-params
                                  *(COMMA diversion-params)

diversion-params    = name-addr *(SEMI (diversion-reason /
                           diversion-counter / diversion-limit /
                           diversion-privacy / diversion-screen /
                           diversion-extension))


So in rfc6044, the sintax allow comma separated bodies for one Diversion 
header, which was not in rfc5806. Obviously, the current diversion 
parser throws error, so I guess it has to be updated to accept a format 
similar to Route headers.

My question is, apart of rfc number and the policy more recent (bigger 
values) obsoletes older (lower value) specification, does the 
Informational or Historic category to set some extra rules?

Btw, are people here still using (or ever used -- I didn't so far) 
Diversion?

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- http://www.asipto.com
http://linkedin.com/in/miconda -- http://twitter.com/miconda

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-dev/attachments/20120131/68b1a21c/attachment.htm>