|<< Back to previous view|
[SIPSERVLET_SPEC-28] Compact header form behavior unclear Created: 17/Jan/13 Updated: 26/Mar/14 Resolved: 07/Feb/14
|Remaining Estimate:||Not Specified|
|Time Spent:||Not Specified|
|Original Estimate:||Not Specified|
|Participants:||binod and echeung|
The Javadoc of SipServletMessage is unclear:
Currently, the application has no knowledge of the header form of an incoming message. The application can influence the header form on an outgoing message. Also note that if there are mixed usage of long and compact forms, there is no way to preserve the forms when copying from one message to another. This may cause problem for some corner interop situations.
|Comment by binod [ 10/Dec/13 11:20 AM ]|
Now that we have a new method getHeaderNameList(), would it make sense to specify long and compact name behavior only to the new method or should we also specify the behavior of getHeaderNames?
|Comment by binod [ 07/Feb/14 11:16 AM ]|
As per the EG discussion, we decided that both getHeaderNames and getHeaderNameList will return header names in the long format. The implementations seem to be comfortable with this change and will not introduce backward incompatibility.