[Serusers] Re: FW: [Sip-implementors] Whitespace after value in SIP header field

[Nils Ohlmeier]

On Wednesday 17 November 2004 18:42, Jiri Kuthan wrote:
> At 10:13 PM 11/16/2004, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
> >Sorry but I do not agree to implement a RFC compliance test which is IMHO
> > not covered by the RFC (yet).
>
> Scope of SFTF is actually not spell-checking RFC compliance but more
> general, interoperability.

Yes that is true. But up to now there is no single test in STFT implemented 
which is not 100% covered by the RFC.

> See 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sipping-torture-tests-04.txt
> for what it may be. The receiver should be liberal and if they don't
> understand something, they should skip it (as opposed to denying a
> request).

I know it :-)
Only a very small subset of this draft is implemented in SFTF. And for every 
of these implemented tests it is IMO absolutely clear from the RFC how the UA 
should react. This is not the case for spaces at the end of the MF header or 
any header in general.
We can discuss to add a new section of optional tests which should be passed 
to improve interoperability, but which are not mandatory because they are not 
(yet) covered by a RFC. But I'll not make such a dession on my own.

Greetings
  Nils