[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       sip-implementors
Subject:    Re: [Sip-implementors] Address scheme 'sip'/'sips' with transportTLS
From:       "Caglar ER" <cer () NETAS ! com ! tr>
Date:       2011-01-27 17:52:47
Message-ID: E5B2D9C61F8C3C4CA1CB41DE2FE866F609A0B9E7 () netasmx ! netas ! lab ! nortel ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Some devices doesn't support sips for TLS , only suporting sip. And they
are used in network. It can be used with SIP as TLS.

Cheers, 
B.Caglar ER 

-----Original Message-----
From: sip-implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of
Worley, Dale R (Dale)
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 5:51 PM
To: Tarun2 Gupta; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Address scheme 'sip'/'sips' with
transportTLS

________________________________________
From: sip-implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[sip-implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Tarun2
Gupta [tarun2.gupta@aricent.com]

I am using transport TLS. Is it necessary to use address scheme as
'sips' in SIP messages sent? If not, is use of address scheme 'sip' with
transport TLS correct, what are the use cases for the same?
________________________________

I would check with RFC 5630.  That RFC corrected and clarified many
things about use of sips:.

Dale

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]