Hello,
The response must be 200 OK.
What the RFC 4825 means, is that the result of the predicate application is
only valid if the result is unique. The uniqueness has to be enforced only
when dealing with predicates. Element selection without predicates can
return a list as mentioned earlier in
El Martes, 17 de Noviembre de 2009, Laurent Etiemble escribió:
Hello,
The response must be 200 OK.
What the RFC 4825 means, is that the result of the predicate application is
only valid if the result is unique. The uniqueness has to be enforced only
when dealing with predicates. Element
Hi all,
Below I assume using tcp transport for registrations.
As I understand, while using a reliable transport for dialogs the
connection between UAC and the next hop is active until the dialog is
terminated by one party sending BYE and another party responding back.
The connections on both
El Martes, 17 de Noviembre de 2009, Brez Borland escribió:
Hi all,
Below I assume using tcp transport for registrations.
As I understand, while using a reliable transport for dialogs the
connection between UAC and the next hop is active until the dialog is
terminated by one party sending
Brez Borland wrote:
Hi all,
Below I assume using tcp transport for registrations.
As I understand, while using a reliable transport for dialogs the
connection between UAC and the next hop is active until the dialog is
terminated by one party sending BYE and another party responding
El Martes, 17 de Noviembre de 2009, Victor Pascual Avila escribió:
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo i...@aliax.net wrote:
Read RFC 5256 Managing Client-Initiated Connections (previously
sip-outboud draft). It is the new way to handle those situations.
* rfc5626
Thanks
Thank you all, it is clear to me now.
Quick look at 5626. The new spec is big. But though made it easier on
me. At least we came up with the way to tackle these situations.
Regards,
Brez
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Paul Kyzivat pkyzi...@cisco.com wrote:
Brez Borland wrote:
Hi all,
El Miércoles, 18 de Noviembre de 2009, Brez Borland escribió:
Thank you all, it is clear to me now.
Quick look at 5626. The new spec is big.
Too big, too complex and too late IMHO.
I still wake up every day asking myself how SIP protocol was born assuming
there is no NAT... :(
--
Iñaki
That is a shame indeed.. :(
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo i...@aliax.net wrote:
El Miércoles, 18 de Noviembre de 2009, Brez Borland escribió:
Thank you all, it is clear to me now.
Quick look at 5626. The new spec is big.
Too big, too complex and too late IMHO.
I
