[sr-dev] IETF-RFCs and Diversion header

[Henning Westerholt]

On Tuesday 31 January 2012, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
> [...]
> 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?

Hi Daniel,

if I understand RFC 6044 correctly, its about the interworking between 
History-Info and Diversion. About the syntax changes I can't comment at the 
moment.
 
>  Btw, are people here still using (or ever used -- I didn't so far)
> Diversion?

Yes, we're using it a lot at the moment. AFAIK one of the reasons that the 
IETF published Diversion as a history RFC was to admit that even after seven 
years since the publishing of RFC 4244 people keep using the Diversion header. 
Probably because its just simpler for the common use case - preventing call 
forwarding loops in VoIP signalization and PSTN interconnection and many 
existing equipment out there supports it.

Best regards,

Henning