< Previous by Date Date Index Next by Date >
< Previous in Thread Thread Index Next in Thread >

Re: [reSIProcate] [reSIProcate-users] text parameter collision?


OK - I've redefined the text parameter from ExistsParameter to
ExistsOrDataParameter in order to be compatible with both RFC's - I
think this will solve your issue.

Scott

On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Scott Godin <sgodin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Moving to resiprocate-devel....
>
> This is an interesting problem - the same parameter "text" is defined
> differently in two different RFC's:
> RFC3840 - ExistsParameter
> RFC3326 - QuotedDataParameter
> Is this the first time we've had such a collision?   Any suggestions
> for handling this - other than to manually parse the Reason header?
>
> Scott
>
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 5:01 AM, Mats Behre <Mats.Behre@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have a problem parsing this embedded Reason header:
>> Reason=sip%3btext%3d%22Moved%20Temporarily%22%3bcause%3d302
>>
>> The problem is that the stack does not seem to be able to find the 'cause'
>> parameter.
>>
>> As this one works fine:
>> Reason=sip%3bcause%3d302%3btext%3d%22Moved%20Temporarily%22
>>
>> I *think* the problem is that there is a 'text' parameter defined, but as an
>> ExistsParameter, according to ParameterTypes.hxx from RFC 3840. It seems
>> that the parser is then confused when a 'text' parameter has a value.
>>
>> The Reason header is defined in RFC 3326.
>>
>> What would be the best way to handle this collision?
>>
>> (Reasonably there should be no difference if it was a plain header and not
>> embedded, but if there really is a difference I decided to show my real
>> problem.)
>>
>> Rgds,
>> Mats
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> resiprocate-users mailing list
>> resiprocate-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> List Archive: http://list.resiprocate.org/archive/resiprocate-users/
>>
>