> > Does the request include *any* Allow header field?
>
> No request do not have any Allow header.
Since you only mentioned "request", you might want to check all of the requests
and responses from the UA associated with the dialog. However as Paul
mentioned, RFC 3261 section 20.5 may be appli
Re: [Sip-implementors] Outgoing REFER but no support for incoming
NOTIFY.
On 10/24/13 10:37 AM, Kumar, Puneet (Puneet) wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am seeing a case where UAC sends an in-dialog REFER but do not include
> "Allow: NOTIFY".
> Due to this UAS is not able to send a
> I am seeing a case where UAC sends an in-dialog
> REFER but do not include "Allow: NOTIFY".
> Due to this UAS is not able to send a NOTIFY
> with sipfrag back to UAC.
>
> Is this valid?
As far as I know, RFC 3515 assumes referrer supports NOTIFY; however it doesn't
indicate that the referrer
On 10/24/13 10:37 AM, Kumar, Puneet (Puneet) wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am seeing a case where UAC sends an in-dialog REFER but do not include
> "Allow: NOTIFY".
> Due to this UAS is not able to send a NOTIFY with sipfrag back to UAC.
>
> Is this valid?
> What can be use case for not supporting NOTIFY
Hi All,
I am seeing a case where UAC sends an in-dialog REFER but do not include
"Allow: NOTIFY".
Due to this UAS is not able to send a NOTIFY with sipfrag back to UAC.
Is this valid?
What can be use case for not supporting NOTIFY?
Thanks,
Puneet
__
