So the 'automaton' used in examples in RFC 5359 and RFC 7088 should be 'automata', right? I had thought that 'automaton' might be specified in some other RFC that I failed to locate.
Thanks!
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Paul Kyzivat";<pkyzivat at alum.mit.edu>;
Date: Wed, Apr 30, 2014 00:20 AM
To: "ankur bansal"<abh.ankur at gmail.com>; "SIP Learner"<rfc3261 at foxmail.com>;
Cc: "sip-implementors"<sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu>;
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] A question about the automaton feature tag
Post by ankur bansalsip.automata and automata represents same thing i guess
That is arguable. The situation is somewhat complex.
At the time RFC3840 was being written somebody saw a similarity between
the tags being defined for it and feature tags that had been previously
defined for unrelated purposes. And also that the definition of feature
tags had defined matching rules. So it was decided to reuse the existing
definitions and mechanisms for feature tags. (In retrospect I think this
was an error, but nevertheless that is what was done.)
The callerprefs mechanism (RFC3841) that operates in proxies is generic
- it operates the same for all feature tags, and it is important that
proxies be able to do it even for features unknown to them. As a result,
it must be possible for a proxy to distinguish header field parameters
that are feature tags (caller prefs or callee capabilities), from
parameters that serve some other purpose. For that reason the "+" prefix
was introduced to identify parameters that are being used as feature tags.
BUT, drafts of callerprefs had been in progress for years, and there was
a desire to preserve some backward compatibility for those who had
implemented to those drafts. (In retrospect this was probably also a
mistake.) So the set of sip feature tags that had been in the draft were
designated "base tags". These are *special*, and are grandfathered. They
are to be used without the leading "+sip." even though they are defined
in the "sip tree" of feature tags. The text also *allows* the base tags
to be used with a "+sip." or even "sip." prefix.
Any other feature tags that are used MUST use the "+" prefix and the
full name of the tag including the prefix for the tree it falls within.
Post by ankur bansalEither its set as sip.automata=true/false OR automata(true by default)
The following would all be ok:
automata
automata=true
automata=false
+sip.automata
+sip.automata=true
+sip.automata=false
sip.automata
sip.automata=true
sip.automata=false
Thanks,
Paul
Post by ankur bansalFeature parameter(not feature tag) can be added to Contact header by
UA(mostly some answering machine/voicemail server/IVR/announcement
server ) with value true or false
True : Call handled by answering
machine/voicemail server/IVR/announcement server
False : Call handled by human.
Mostly its seen when some server sends INVITE and add in Contact header .
Also this can be used in Register Contact header like sip.automata=false
to refuse to communicate with automation server .
Thanks & regards
Ankur Bansal
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 8:05 PM, SIP Learner <rfc3261 at foxmail.com
Thanks Paul!
At first I thought automaton as a typo too, but I found out that the
most recent RFC7088 also use automaton instead of automata, that's
why I asked the question.
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Paul Kyzivat";<pkyzivat at alum.mit.edu
<mailto:pkyzivat at alum.mit.edu>>;
Date: Tue, Apr 29, 2014 08:35 PM
To: "sip-implementors"<sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
<mailto:sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu>>;
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] A question about the automaton feature tag
I presume "automaton" is simply an error - a misspelling.
You can look in the iana registry for all the defined feature tags.
Post by SIP LearnerHi, guys!
I am reading RFC5359 for SIP services examples, some of the
Contact: <sips:music at server.example.com
<mailto:sips%3Amusic at server.example.com>>;automaton
Post by SIP Learner;+sip.byeless;+sip.rendering="no"
FRC5359 states that the automaton feature tag is defined in
RFC3840, but RFC3840 actually defined sip.automata instead of automaon.
Post by SIP LearnerWhat is the difference between automaton and sip.automata anyway?
Are they equivalent or are they different?
Post by SIP LearnerThanks a lot!
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
<mailto:Sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu>
Post by SIP Learnerhttps://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
<mailto:Sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu>
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
.
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
<mailto:Sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu>
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors