Hi Doug, If I recall correctly, the conclusion of the following thread was that nobody cares about fixing any of the existing incompatibilities.
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip/current/msg26318.html The following email shows why it might be valid (i.e. structured subset of opaque_part of RFC 2396 absoluteURI). http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip/current/msg26325.html The following RFC 2396 section 3.1 snippet may be of interest. "The URI syntax consists of a sequence of components separated by reserved characters, with the first component defining the semantics for the remainder of the URI string." > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:sip- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Doug Sauder > Sent: Friday, January 09, 2015 2:51 PM > To: sip-implementors > Subject: [Sip-implementors] SIP URI syntax vs. generic URI syntax > > The SIP URI syntax in RFC 3261 is not compatible with the generic URI syntax > in RFC 3986. Specifically, the character "?" should not appear in the user > component. Arguably, the character "/" > also should not appear in the user component. > > Surely this topic must have been discussed before now. Does anyone have > information about prior discussions, or other comments on this topic? Has > there been a previous attempt to make the SIP URI syntax compatible with the > generic URI syntax? > > Thanks! _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
