[SIPForum-discussion] Record-Route Header Allowable in 4xx-6xx Responses?

[Abhisek Acharya]

To me Record-route header in 4xx and 6xx responses are  not required and
this is not permissible

over to you guys

abhisek

On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 11:31 PM, <nickdiciaccio at comcast.net> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I went through RFC 3261 and I saw where a UAS must include a record-route
> header in a response back to a UAC which establishes a session (see section
> 12.1.1).  However, I didn't see in the RFC where a UAS is specifically
> prohibited from sending a record-route header back in a response which
> doesn't establish a session, i.e. a 4xx-6xx response.  Can someone confirm
> for me whether it's permissible for SIP responses in the 4xx-6xx range to
> include the record-route header?
>
> Nick
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the SIP Forum discussion mailing list
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE, or edit your delivery options, please visit
> http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
> Post to the list at discussion at sipforum.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20120831/dc51c073/attachment-0002.html>