Why would you want to authorize the CANCEL and not also the preceding
INVITE?
If the INVITE was challenged and authorized, the CANCEL can carry the same
credentials, correct?
Am I missing something?
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 12:08 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Sip-implementors] CANCEL with Authorization
Hi All,
I have a doubt with regards to the following scanario :
UserAgent
| INVITE Cseq:1
|<==================================
| CANCEL Cseq:1
|<==================================
| 401 (CANCEL) Cseq:1
|==================================>
| CANCEL with Authorization Cseq:1
|<==================================
| 401 (CANCEL) Cseq:1 (WRONG !!)
|==================================>
Since the CANCEL (with Authorization header) is resent with the
same Cseq as the original (unauthrorized) CANCEL, the remote
retransmission logic mistakes it to be a retransmission of original
CANCEL, and hence retransmits the 401.
Should the CANCEL with Auth be sent with a higher Cseq ?
As per the draft, the Cseq of the CANCEL should always match
that of the INVITE that it is cancelling. How should this case be handled
at the UAS end?
Regards,
Subhash.
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
