[Asterisk-Dev] Authorization header not formatted properly when REGISTER msg is challenged (algorithm=MD5)

[Michael Lunsford]

Thanks everyone. That was fast work. I wish everything was this easy to
get resolved. I'm sure I'll be posting something again soon ... With
this patch put in, I can now register but the Cisco switch complains of
a bad hash when the Asterisk sends a response INVITE where the qop
parameter is required. I need to look through the source and see what is
actually being hashed in the Asterisk. I have verified the user/name and
password valid but for some reason it's not returning the right hash.

Thanks again for the help,
Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-dev-admin at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-dev-admin at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Rob Gagnon
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 2:16 AM
To: asterisk-dev at lists.digium.com
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Dev] Authorization header not formatted properly
when REGISTER msg is challenged (algorithm=MD5)


Never mind my last posting... It has been fixed under bug 2116:

http://bugs.digium.com/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002116

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tilghman Lesher" <tilghman at mail.jeffandtilghman.com>
To: <asterisk-dev at lists.digium.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 11:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Dev] Authorization header not formatted properly
when REGISTER msg is challenged (algorithm=MD5)


> On Thursday 22 July 2004 17:47, Rob Gagnon wrote:
> > This is interesting....  You obviously are right, in that the quotes

> > fix your problem.  The issue seems to stem from an inconsistency in 
> > RFC3261...
> >
> > Sections 20.27, and 20.44 show examples with the MD5 without
> > quotes: Example:
> >       Proxy-Authenticate: Digest realm="atlanta.com",
> >       domain="sip:ss1.carrier.com", qop="auth",
> >       nonce="f84f1cec41e6cbe5aea9c8e88d359",
> >       opaque="", stale=FALSE, algorithm=MD5
> >
> > Now, in Section 25.1 (Basic Rules), the value for "algorithm" is 
> > shown to apparently require the quotes:
> >    algorithm = "algorithm" EQUAL ( "MD5" / "MD5-sess" / token )
>
> No inconsistency.  If the RFC writers had meant for the quotes to be 
> there, they would have written:
>
> algorithm = "algorithm" EQUAL <"> ( "MD5" | "MD5-sess" | token ) <">
>
> Take a look at the stated grammar for one of the other fields that has

> quoted values, and you'll see the special notation.
>
> --
> Tilghman
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Dev mailing list
> Asterisk-Dev at lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Dev mailing list
Asterisk-Dev at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev