RFC 6044: Mapping and Interworking of Diversion Information between Diversion and History-Info Headers in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
This RFC has been replaced. Do not implement against it for new work — it was formally obsoleted by RFC 7544.
Current version: RFC 7544 — Mapping and Interworking of Diversion Information between Diversion and History-Info Header Fields in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Although the SIP History-Info header is the solution adopted in IETF, the non-standard Diversion header is nevertheless widely implemented and used for conveying call-diversion-related information in SIP signaling. This document describes a recommended interworking guideline between the Diversion header and the History-Info header to handle call diversion information. In addition, an interworking policy is proposed to manage the headers' coexistence. The History-Info header is described in RFC 4244 and the non-standard Diversion header is described, as Historic, in RFC 5806. Since the Diversion header is used in many existing network implementations for the transport of call diversion information, its interworking with the SIP History-Info standardized solution is needed. This work is intended to enable the migration from non- standard implementations and deployment toward IETF specification- based implementations and deployment. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6044
- Published
- October 2010
- Authors
- M. Mohali
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- INDEPENDENT
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 24
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoleted by:
- RFC 7544
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?