[Freeswitch-dev] Call-ID formatting

[Kristian Kielhofner]

I just realized this is ambiguous...  Technically 2543 defined "SIP
2.0" but "SIP 2.0" behavior today is generally considered to be 3261
compliant, not 2543 compliant although you still run into 2543
behavior in various ways and it's not necessarily "wrong".

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Kristian Kielhofner <kris at kriskinc.com> wrote:
> RFC3261 defines SIP 2.0.  2543 is deprecated.  3261 section 8.1.1.4 says:
>
> "Use of cryptographically random identifiers (RFC 1750 [12]) in the
>   generation of Call-IDs is RECOMMENDED.  Implementations MAY use the
>   form "localid at host".  Call-IDs are case-sensitive and are simply
>   compared byte-by-byte."
>
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Kurtis Heimerl
> <kheimerl at cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>> According to the sip standard, call-ids should have a "host" trailer
>> (e.g., f81d4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6bf6 at foo.bar.com)
>>
>> Reference: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2543.txt Section 6.12
>>
>> FreeSwitch doesn't do this, omitting the "@foo.bar.com" portion of the
>> above. Is there any reason why this is the case? This seems too large
>> of an issue to be a bug or oversight.
>>
>> Here's an example from a FS MESSAGE:
>>
>> Call-ID: 000b3694-76e4-122f-55b3-5cff350d9de5
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Join us at ClueCon 2011, Aug 9-11, Chicago
>> http://www.cluecon.com 877-7-4ACLUE
>>
>> FreeSWITCH-dev mailing list
>> FreeSWITCH-dev at lists.freeswitch.org
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-dev
>> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-dev
>> http://www.freeswitch.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Kristian Kielhofner
>



-- 
Kristian Kielhofner