2011/10/3 Olle E. Johansson <oej@xxxxxxxxxx>: > The clause about a dual-stack user agent clearly doesn't follow RFC 3263, > since it implies "and" instead of "or". There's no MUST, SHOULD or MAY > language applied here, so it seems like this is an oversight - not that RFC > 6157 is wrong, but that there should have been a more clear update to RFC > 3263. > Nitpicking, but I think it's important to clarify the DNS functionality in > regards to dual stacks. In addition, I think there's a need for a BCP to > explain how a domain can indicate > preference of address family - ipv4 or ipv6 - by using SRV entries. I expect that any vendor implementing SIP over IPv4 and IPv6 should also implement DNS A and AAAA. But I agree that there should be a mention to it somewhere in a RFC (not a "or" but an "and"). -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@xxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
