[Freeswitch-users] 300 message without Diversion header

[Tihomir Culjaga]

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:38 AM, Philipp Kempgen <lists at kempgen.net> wrote:

> Tihomir Culjaga wrote:
>
> > should the 3000/302 message always contain a diversion field saying
> > the call is diverted ?
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5806#section-5.3
> says it "SHOULD".
>

everything in RFC is "SHOULD" or "MAY" ... this is not ETSI.


>
> The Diversion header could be encrypted (/removed?) for privacy
> reasons.
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5806#section-7
>
>
>
there is a Flag for privacy on Diversion header and its not supposed to be
removed in this case :=)

   diversion-privacy = "privacy" "=" ( "full" | "name" |
                       "uri" | "off" | token | quoted-string )






>    Philipp
>
> --
> http://twitter.com/kempgen
>
> _______________________________________________
> FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
> FreeSWITCH-users at lists.freeswitch.org
> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
> http://www.freeswitch.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/attachments/20110527/2b56c0f3/attachment.html