torture-test.txt

这是国外的resip协议栈

 SIPPING Working Group                                    A. Johnston 
   Internet Draft                                              WorldCom 
   Document: draft-ietf-sipping-torture-tests-00.txt       J. Rosenberg 
   Expires: February 2003                                   dynamicsoft 
                                                         H. Schulzrinne 
                                                            Columbia U. 
                                                            August 2002 
    
    
             Session Initiation Protocol Torture Test Messages 
    
    
Status of this Memo 
    
   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.  
    
   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that      
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts. 
    
   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 
    
   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 
        http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 
   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 
        http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 
    
    
Abstract 
    
   This informational document gives examples of Session Initiation 
   Protocol (SIP) test messages designed to exercise and "torture" a 
   parser.  They were developed as part of the SIPit SIP 
   interoperability testing events.    
    
    
Conventions used in this document 
    
   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [1]. 
    
Table of Contents 
    
   1. Overview.......................................................3 
 
 
Johnston et al         Expires - February 2003               [Page 1] 

                      SIP Torture Test Messages           August 2002 
 
 
   2. SIP Test Messages..............................................3 
      2.1 INVITE Parser Torture Test Message.........................3 
      2.2 INVITE with Proxy-Require and Require......................4 
      2.3 INVITE with Unknown Schemes in URIs........................5 
      2.4 REGISTER with Y2038 Test...................................5 
      2.5 INVITE with inconsistent Accept and message body...........6 
      2.6 INVITE with non-SDP message body...........................6 
      2.7 Unknown Method Message.....................................7 
      2.8 Unknown Method with CSeq Error.............................7 
      2.9 REGISTER with Unknown Authorization Scheme.................8 
      2.10 Multiple SIP Request in a Single Message..................8 
      2.11 INVITE missing Required Headers...........................9 
      2.12 INVITE with Duplicate Required Headers...................10 
      2.13 INVITE with Illegal Expires Header.......................10 
      2.14 200 OK Response with Broadcast Via Header................11 
      2.15 INVITE with Invalid Via and Contact Headers..............12 
      2.16 INVITE with Incorrect Content-Length Header..............12 
      2.17 INVITE with Invalid Value for Content-Length.............13 
      2.18 INVITE with Garbage after Message Body...................14 
      2.19 INVITE with Error in Display Name in To Header...........14 
      2.20 INVITE with a Semicolon-Separated Parameter in the "user" 
      Part..........................................................15 
      2.21 INVITE with Illegal Enclosing of Request-URI  in "<>"....15 
      2.22 INVITE with Illegal LWS within Elements of Request-URI...16 
      2.23 INVITE with illegal >1 SP between elements of Request URI17 
      2.24 INVITE with a legal SIP URI containing escaped characters17 
      2.25 INVITE with the illegal use of escaped headers in Request-URI
      ..............................................................18 
      2.26 INVITE containing an unknown scheme in the Request URI...19 
      2.27 OPTIONS with no LWS between display name and <...........19 
      2.28 OPTIONS with extran LWS between display name and <.......20 
      2.29 INVITE with an illegal SIP Date format...................20 
      2.30 INVITE with Passed Expries Time..........................21 
      2.31 INVITE with Max-Forwards Set to Zero.....................21 
      2.32 REGISTER with a Escaped Header in a Legal SIP URI of a 
      Contact.......................................................22 
      2.33 REGISTER with a Escaped Header in a Illegal SIP URI of a 
      Contact.......................................................22 
      2.34 INVITE with Long Values in Headers.......................23 
      2.35 OPTIONS with multiple headers............................24 
      2.36 INVITE with large number of SDP attributes and telephone 
      subscriber Request-URI........................................25 
      2.37 REGISTER with a contact parameter........................26 
      2.38 REGISTER with a url parameter............................26 
      2.39 INVITE with an Unquoted Display Name Containing Multiple 
      Tokens........................................................26 
      2.40 INVITE with an Unquoted Display Name Containg Non-Token 
      Characters....................................................27 
      2.41 INVITE with Unknown (Higher) Protocol Version in Start Line27 
      2.42 INVITE with RFC2543 syntax...............................28 
   Security Considerations..........................................28 
   References.......................................................28 
   Acknowledgments..................................................29 
   Author's Addresses...............................................29 
    
1.   Overview 
    
   These SIP test messages are based on the current version 2.0 of SIP 
   in RFC 3261[2] with SDP usage described in RFC 3264[3].  
    
   Note that this document is informational, and is NOT NORMATIVE on any 
   aspect of SIP syntax. 
    
2.   SIP Test Messages 
    
   The files in here are test messages for SIP servers to exercise 
   various functions. They have been used in SIPit 
   interoperability events.  All messages shown here are valid, unless 
   otherwise noted.  The correct behavior of servers and clients is also 
   described. 
 
2.1    INVITE Parser Torture Test Message 
    
   This message is a correctly formatted SIP message. It contains: 
    
   line folding all over 
   escaped characters within quotes 
   LWS between colons, semicolons, headers, and other fields 
   both comma separated and separate listing of headers 
   mix or short and long form for the same header 
   unknown header field 
   unusual header ordering 
   unknown parameters of a known header 
    
   Proxies should forward message and clients should respond as to a 
   normal INVITE message. 
    
    
   Message Details 
    
   INVITE sip:[e-mail] SIP/2.0 
   TO : 
    sip:[e-mail] ;   tag    = 1918181833n 
   From   : "J Rosenberg \\\"" <sip:[e-mail]> ; 
     tag = 98asjd8 
   Max-Forwards: 6 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.1.1.1 
 
 
Johnston et al         Expires - February 2002               [Page 3] 

                      SIP Torture Test Messages           August 2002 
 
 
   cseq: 8 
     INVITE 
   Via  : SIP  /   2.0 
    /UDP 
       135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Subject : 
   NewFangledHeader:   newfangled value 
    more newfangled value 
   Content-Type: application/sdp 
   v:  SIP  / 2.0  / TCP     1192.168.156.222   ; 
     branch  =   9ikj8  , 
    SIP  /    2.0   / UDP  192.168.255.111   ; hidden 
   m:"Quoted string \"\"" <sip:[e-mail]> ; newparam = 
   newvalue ; 
     secondparam = secondvalue  ; q = 0.33, 
    tel:[phone] 
    
   v=0 
   o=mhandley 29739 7272939 IN IP4 126.5.4.3 
   s=- 
   c=IN IP4 135.180.130.88 
   t=0 0 
   m=audio 492170 RTP/AVP 0 12 
   m=video 3227 RTP/AVP 31 
   a=rtpmap:31 LPC 
    
    
2.2    INVITE with Proxy-Require and Require 
    
   This message tests support for Proxy-Require and Require. It is a 
   request that contains both headers, listing new features. 
    
   Proxies and clients should respond with a 420 Bad Extension, and an 
   Unsupported header listing these features. 
    
   Message Details 
    
   INVITE sip:[e-mail] SIP/2.0 
   To: sip:[e-mail] 
   From: sip:[e-mail];tag=242etr 
   Max-Forward: 6 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.1.1.1 
   Require: newfeature1, newfeature2 
   Proxy-Require: newfeature3, newfeature4 
   CSeq: 8 INVITE 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
    
    

 
 
Johnston et al         Expires - February 2002               [Page 4] 

                      SIP Torture Test Messages           August 2002 
 
 
2.3    INVITE with Unknown Schemes in URIs 
    
   This message contains unknown schemes in the Request URI, To, From 
   and Contact headers of a request. 
    
   A server should probably return a not found error; but other 
   behaviors are acceptable. 
    
    
   Message Details 
    
   INVITE name:John_Smith SIP/2.0 
   To: isbn:2983792873 
   From: <http://www.cs.columbia.edu>;tag=3234233 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.1.2.3 
   CSeq: 8 INVITE 
   Max-Forward: 7 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133:5060;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Content-Type: application/sdp 
    
   v=0 
   o=mhandley 29739 7272939 IN IP4 126.5.4.3 
   s=- 
   c=IN IP4 135.180.130.88 
   t=0 0 
   m=audio 492170 RTP/AVP 0 12 
   m=video 3227 RTP/AVP 31 
   a=rtpmap:31 LPC 
    
    
    
2.4    REGISTER with Y2038 Test 
    
   This message is a registration request with an expiration year of 
   2040. This makes sure that a server doesn't crash on seeing a date 
   past Y2038. 
    
   The correct behavior is probably to limit the lifetime to some 
   configured maximum. 
    
    
   Message Details 
    
   REGISTER sip:company.com SIP/2.0 
   To: sip:[e-mail] 
   From: sip:[e-mail];tag=3411345 
   Max-Forwards: 8 
   Contact: sip:[e-mail] 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.0.0.1 
 
 
Johnston et al         Expires - February 2002               [Page 5] 

                      SIP Torture Test Messages           August 2002 
 
 
   CSeq: 8 REGISTER 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Expires: Sat, 01 Dec 2040 16:00:00 GMT 
    
    
    
2.5    INVITE with inconsistent Accept and message body 
    
   This is a UAS test. It is a request that includes an Accept header 
   without SDP. The UAS should respond with an error. 
    
    
   Message Details 
    
   INVITE sip:[e-mail] SIP/2.0 
   To: sip:[e-mail] 
   From: sip:[e-mail];tag=234 
   Max-Forwards: 5 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.0.0.1 
   Accept: text/newformat 
   CSeq: 8 INVITE 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Content-Type: application/sdp 
    
   v=0 
   c=IN IP4 135.180.130.88 
   m=audio 492170 RTP/AVP 0 12 
   m=video 3227 RTP/AVP 31 
   a=rtpmap:31 LPC 
    
    
    
2.6    INVITE with non-SDP message body 
    
   This is a test of a user agent server. It is a request that includes 
   a body of a non-SDP type. 
    
   The user agent server should respond with an error. 
    
   Message Details 
    
   INVITE sip:[e-mail] SIP/2.0 
   To: sip:[e-mail] 
   From: sip:[e-mail];tag=8 
   Max-Forwards: 70 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.0.0.1 
   CSeq: 8 INVITE 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Content-Type: application/newformat 
 
 
Johnston et al         Expires - February 2002               [Page 6] 

                      SIP Torture Test Messages           August 2002 
 
 
    
   <audio> <pcmu port="443"/> </audio> 2.7    Unknown Method Message 
    
   This request message contains a new unknown method, NEWMETHOD. 
    
   A proxy should forward this using the same retransmission rules as 
   BYE. A UAS should reject it with an error, and list the available 
   methods in the response. 
    
    
   Message Details 
    
   NEWMETHOD sip:[e-mail] SIP/2.0 
   To: sip:[e-mail] 
   From: sip:[e-mail];tag=34525 
   Max-Forwards: 6 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.0.0.1 
   CSeq: 8 NEWMETHOD 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Content-Type: application/sdp 
    
   v=0 
   o=mhandley 29739 7272939 IN IP4 126.5.4.3 
   c=IN IP4 135.180.130.88 
   m=audio 492170 RTP/AVP 0 12 
   m=video 3227 RTP/AVP 31 
   a=rtpmap:31 LPC 
    
    
    
2.8    Unknown Method with CSeq Error 
    
   This message is nearly identical to the Unknown Method message. It is 
   a request with a new unknown method, but with a CSeq method tag which 
   does not match. 
    
   A proxy should either respond with an error, or correct the method 
   tag. The user agent should reject it with an error, and list the 
   available methods in the response. 
    
    
   Message Details 
 
   NEWMETHOD sip:[e-mail] SIP/2.0 
   To: sip:[e-mail] 
   From: sip:[e-mail];tag=23411413 
   Max-Forwards: 3 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.0.1.1 
   CSeq: 8 INVITE 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Content-Type: application/sdp 
    
   v=0 
   o=mhandley 29739 7272939 IN IP4 126.5.4.3 
   s=- 
   c=IN IP4 135.180.130.88 
   t=0 0 
   m=audio 492170 RTP/AVP 0 12 
   m=video 3227 RTP/AVP 31 
   a=rtpmap:31 LPC 
    
    
    
2.9    REGISTER with Unknown Authorization Scheme 
    
   This message is a REGISTER request with an unknown authorization 
   scheme. 
    
   The server should do something reasonable, such as rejecting the 
   request. 
    
   Message Details 
    
   REGISTER sip:company.com SIP/2.0 
   To: sip:[e-mail] 
   From: sip:[e-mail];tag=87321hj23128 
   Max-Forwards: 8 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.0.1.1 
   CSeq: 8 REGISTER 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Authorization: Super-PGP ajsohdaosdh0asyhdaind08yasdknasd09asidhas0d8 
    
    
2.10     Multiple SIP Request in a Single Message 
    
   This message contains two requests, separated by a bunch of 
   whitespace. Since the message exceeds the length indicated in the 
   Content-Length header, the message should be rejected. (Multiple SIP 
   requests per UDP packet are no longer allowed.)  
 
   Message Details 
    
   REGISTER sip:company.com SIP/2.0 
   To: sip:[e-mail] 
   From: sip:[e-mail];tag=43251j3j324 
   Max-Forwards: 8 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isndaksdj@10.0.2.2 
   Contact: sip:[e-mail] 
   CSeq: 8 REGISTER 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Content-Length: 0 
    
    
   INVITE sip:[e-mail] SIP/2.0 
   To: sip:[e-mail] 
   From: sip:[e-mail];tag=141334 
   Max-Forwards: 8 
   Call-ID: 0ha0isnda977644900765@10.0.0.1 
   CSeq: 8 INVITE 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Content-Type: application/sdp 
    
   v=0 
   o=mhandley 29739 7272939 IN IP4 126.5.4.3 
   s=- 
   c=IN IP4 135.180.130.88 
   t=0 0 
   m=audio 492170 RTP/AVP 0 12 
   m =video 3227 RTP/AVP 31 
   a=rtpmap:31 LPC 
    
    
    
2.11     INVITE missing Required Headers 
    
   This message contains no Call-ID, From, or To header. 
    
   The server should not crash, and ideally should respond with an 
   error. 
    
   Message Details 
    
   INVITE sip:[e-mail] SIP/2.0 
   CSeq: 0 INVITE 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Content-Type: application/sdp 
    
   v=0 
   o=mhandley 29739 7272939 IN IP4 126.5.4.3 
   s=- 
   c=IN IP4 135.180.130.88 
   t=0 0 
   m=audio 492170 RTP/AVP 0 12 
   m=video 3227 RTP/AVP 31 
   a=rtpmap:31 LPC 
    
    
    
2.12     INVITE with Duplicate Required Headers 
    
   The message contains a request with an extra Call-ID and To field. 
    
   The server should not crash, and should ideally respond with an 
   error. 
    
   Message Details 
    
   INVITE sip:[e-mail] SIP/2.0 
   Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 135.180.130.133;branch=z9hG4bKkdjuw 
   Max-Forwards: 70 
   CSeq: 0 INVITE 
   Call-ID: 98asdh@10.1.1.1 
   Call-ID: 98asdh@10.1.1.2