RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

RFC 3261, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", June 2002

Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 3265, RFC 3853, RFC 4320, RFC 4916, RFC 5393, RFC 5621, RFC 5626, RFC 5630, RFC 5922, RFC 5954, RFC 6026, RFC 6141, RFC 6665, RFC 6878, RFC 7462, RFC 7463, RFC 8217, RFC 8591, RFC 8760, RFC 8898, RFC 8996

Source of RFC: sip (rai)

Errata ID: 3237
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT

Reported By: Kevin P. Fleming
Date Reported: 2012-05-31
Held for Document Update by: Robert Sparks

Section 8.1.3.5 says:

   In all of the above cases, the request is retried by creating a new
   request with the appropriate modifications.  This new request
   constitutes a new transaction and SHOULD have the same value of the
   Call-ID, To, and From of the previous request, but the CSeq should
   contain a new sequence number that is one higher than the previous.

It should say:

   In all of the above cases, the request is retried by creating a new 
   request with the appropriate modifications.  This new request 
   constitutes a new transaction and SHOULD have the same value of the 
   Call-ID, To, and From of the previous request, but the CSeq SHOULD 
   contain a new sequence number that is one higher than the previous.

Notes:

We have had one implementor claim that they are not required to increment CSeq when retrying the request because the RFC says 'should' and not 'SHOULD'. Based on current IETF discussions, though, these should probably be changed to MUST anyway, but that's a much more substantive change throughout the whole RFC.

Report New Errata



Advanced Search