[Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Nabam Serbang
Hi All, Section 13.2.2.4 of rfc 3261 says that If the offer in the 2xx response is not acceptable, the UAC core MUST generate a valid answer in the ACK and then send a BYE immediately I have some question on this behavior: 1) If the offer being presented in 2xx (200 OK) for INVITE is not

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Neelakantan Balasubramanian
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nabam Serbang Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 2:03 AM To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu Subject: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE Hi All, Section 13.2.2.4 of rfc 3261 says that If the offer in the 2xx

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Dale Worley
On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 13:32 +0530, Nabam Serbang wrote: 1) If the offer being presented in 2xx (200 OK) for INVITE is not acceptable by UAC, what would be the valid answer in that ACK? Remember this not re-INVITE which will have prior SDP. No doubt you can take the SDP in the 200, modify in

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Paul Kyzivat
Dale Worley wrote: On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 13:32 +0530, Nabam Serbang wrote: 1) If the offer being presented in 2xx (200 OK) for INVITE is not acceptable by UAC, what would be the valid answer in that ACK? Remember this not re-INVITE which will have prior SDP. No doubt you can take the SDP

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Maxim Sobolev
Paul Kyzivat wrote: Dale Worley wrote: On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 13:32 +0530, Nabam Serbang wrote: 1) If the offer being presented in 2xx (200 OK) for INVITE is not acceptable by UAC, what would be the valid answer in that ACK? Remember this not re-INVITE which will have prior SDP. No doubt

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Maxim Sobolev
Maxim Sobolev wrote: 0 means that the stream has been rejected. Any sensible UAC should send ^^^ UAS in this case. Regards, -- Maksym Sobolyev Sippy Software, Inc. Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts T/F: +1-646-651-1110 Web:

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Paul Kyzivat
Maxim Sobolev wrote: Paul Kyzivat wrote: Dale Worley wrote: On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 13:32 +0530, Nabam Serbang wrote: 1) If the offer being presented in 2xx (200 OK) for INVITE is not acceptable by UAC, what would be the valid answer in that ACK? Remember this not re-INVITE which will

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Maxim Sobolev
Paul Kyzivat wrote: Maxim Sobolev wrote: Paul Kyzivat wrote: Dale Worley wrote: On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 13:32 +0530, Nabam Serbang wrote: 1) If the offer being presented in 2xx (200 OK) for INVITE is not acceptable by UAC, what would be the valid answer in that ACK? Remember this not

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Dale Worley
On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 13:43 -0800, Maxim Sobolev wrote: Putting port number 0 into m-line should be just enough. Port number of 0 means that the stream has been rejected. Any sensible [UAS] should send a BYE upon receipt of such SDP answer immediately. And by any sensible UAC should... we

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer in 2xx of INVITE

2008-12-10 Thread Maxim Sobolev
Dale Worley wrote: On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 13:43 -0800, Maxim Sobolev wrote: Putting port number 0 into m-line should be just enough. Port number of 0 means that the stream has been rejected. Any sensible [UAS] should send a BYE upon receipt of such SDP answer immediately. And by any