[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] SIP user fields are crazy. Repeat extension searches if they all fail and semicolons are obfuscating the extension in the uri.

[Olle E. Johansson]

12 maj 2011 kl. 13.24 skrev Kevin P. Fleming:

> On 05/12/2011 05:54 AM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Olle E. Johansson<oej at edvina.net>  wrote:
>>> Bringing this out to the mailing list:
>>> 
>>> Username URI options are just options to the username. We use the username as an extension. I don't see any reason why we should send an option into the dialplan within the extension name. It should be a channel variable that you can read if you want to.
>>> 
>> 
>> Are we talking about URI parameters or ";something" in the user part
>> of the SIP URI? If it's the latter, then they are not parameters and
>> we should let them be there.
>> 
>> In this SIP URI:
>> 
>> sip:saghul;test at sip2sip.info
>> 
>> The username is saghul;test according to the grammar:
>> http://www.tech-invite.com/Ti-abnf-sip.html#userinfo
> 
> We are talking about parameters in the user-part of the URI, not URI parameters.
> 
I think that abnf  is wrong (or not up to date). I am trying to find the RFC that documents this change to RFC 3261. I know I argued around it in a patch for some Nortel systems that started sending options to username parts.

/O