Re: [reSIProcate] Record-Route header for proxies
If you do this, you should also teach the proxy to be aware of
having multiple interfaces and push two RR values (one for the
incoming interface, and one for the outgoing) when the request
goes through. This will allow a response with a signed RR header
field to make it back through without corruption (and it will
free this proxy from the pain of rewriting RR values in responses).
RjS
On Mon, 2004-06-28 at 00:59, Jason Fischl wrote:
> Do people think that the RecordRoute header inserted by a proxy should be
> handled exactly the same way as the Contact and Via headers - with the
> TransportSelector filling in the appropriate value?
>
> Furthermore, should the specific transport used be filled in on the
> RecordRoute header?
>
> e.g.
>
> Record-Route: <sip:1.2.3.4:6000;transport=tcp>
>
> The mechanism of doing this (as a proxy) would be to insert a partially
> filled in RecordRoute header. e.g.
>
> void
> addRecordRoute(SipMessage& msg)
> {
> NameAddr proxy;
> msg.header(h_RecordRoutes).push_front(proxy);
> }
>
> If the proxy wants to be more specific, it can fill in the details for the
> NameAddr proxy - otherwise it is signaling to the stack to fill it in
> appropriately.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel