Brett,
Good point. By sending a reinvite without S-E the UAC can express a desire to abandon the timer, but as you point out, a proxy can still request it.
There really is little/no reason for endpoints to request a session timer, since they are free to send reinvites at will in the absence of one. So if one is present, it is presumably because at least one of the endpoints supports it and a proxy on the path requested it.
So the only way to really get rid of one is for both endpoints to stop claiming that they support it.
Paul
Brett Tate wrote:
I think you just send a reinvite (or update) without a Session-Expires. This probably can't technically be considered a refresh request, since it isn't refreshing the timer. But you might was well consider it an "unrefresh" request. Either side should be able to do this at any time.
Sending a re-INVITE or UPDATE without a session-expires does not deactivate the session timer. It only indicates that the uac prefers not to keep it active. Proxies and/or the uas can still add the session-expires to keep the functionality active.
There is currently no way the uac can turn-off the session timer functionality when timer support is indicated by uac/uas and the proxy/uas keeps it active. However bumping the min-se and session-expires to a really high value can basically produce a similar result.
_______________________________________________ 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
