Re: "*" and "#" signs in the userinfo of SIP URI

Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF) wrote:
> Hi, 
> 
>> It is my impression that the reason it is this way
is so that a sip uri
> is consistent with the generic syntax for URIs. 
> 
> That is the reason that has been given, yes.
> 
>> This is important for those cases where a sip URI
is processed by
> something that understands generic URIs and not 
>> specifically sip URIs. That is something we need to
preserve.
> 
> We need to consider whether that is a realistic case.
> 
> For example, I don't think the "#" would be
used in SIP-URIs which you
> post on webpages etc, which could be scanned by generic
URI parsers. It
> will be used between SIP nodes.

While what you say will probably be true in most cases, I
don't think it 
justifies making a syntax change. For one thing, there are
URL police 
who probably would not approve it. For another, it would
then be very 
difficult to specify the conditions under which it could and
could not 
be used. If the syntax allowed it in dialstring URLs, it
would probably 
also allow it in all sorts of sip URLs. And then you need to
tell people 
to make value judgments about when to use it based on where
they think 
their URLs will be used. Its just not manageable.

	Paul

_______________________________________________
Iptel mailing list
Iptelietf.org
https://
www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel

Paul Kyzivat writes:

 > While what you say will probably be true in most
cases, I don't think it 
 > justifies making a syntax change. For one thing, there
are URL police 
 > who probably would not approve it. 

as i already asked, why didn't this police block # from xmmp
uris?

-- juha

_______________________________________________
Iptel mailing list
Iptelietf.org
https://
www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel