[Serusers] Strict routing

[Jan Janak]

On 06-05 08:01, Juha Heinanen wrote:
> Jan Janak writes:
> 
>  >   But there are some user agents that strip the lr parameter when
>  >   generating Route header fields (i.e. Record-Route contained lr
>  >   parameter but Route created by the user-agent didn't). If that is your
>  >   case then you can use modparam("rr", "enable_full_route", 1) which
>  >   will insert ;lr=on instead of just ;lr which worked for us.
> 
> lr=on may help in case of broken UAs, but are you sure that all RFC3261
> compliant AUs will understand lr=on as the lr parameter?

  No, I am not sure. I saw user agents doing very strange stuff so I
  am pretty sure that there will be at least one which will not handle
  this correctly.

  The spec says that UAs should look if there is an lr parameter in
  URI and, IMHO, ;lr=on counts too because it is lr parameter, it just
  doesn't have empty body (but why would UAs look into the body when
  they just need to know if there is such parameter or not ?).

  Anyway, if you find a UA that doesn't work with lr=on, please report
  it to me.

    Jan.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20030506/36e09cf9/attachment.pgp>