[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One reason could be that I don't want to give the chance to start a transfer
call from both of them.(A transfer B to C and B transfer A to D...what a
funny thing to have C and D talk together..).But beyond this why, from a
protocol point of view, if I give a 503 response back to a reInvite it is
being ignored??
You didn't explain what happened when you tried these things.
You should be able to return a 503 or a 486 to the reinvite if you want,
and it certainly shouldn't be ignored.
If the reinvite fails, then I would hope the UA that sent it would cope
somehow. But exactly how it should cope is open to speculation. Don't be
too surprised if you get a BYE in response. :-)
What would you expect a phone to do if the user pushes the Hold button
and the resulting action doesn't work? Should it push the button back up?
I still remind you that there are commercial softphones that act as I
say and some hardphones that do not.
Who is right then?
I think most of the actions we are discussing should be permitted.
Nobody should get too upset if their peer doesn't act the way they would.
Paul
Michele
===================================================================================
Da: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Data: Nov 23, 2005 5:45:21 PM
A: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [email protected]
Ogg: Re: [Sip-implementors] Avoiding call on hold
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there,
I have a problem.Say to have 2 ep's (A and B) and A put on hold B. I
don't
want that B can put A on hold as well.I 've tried to send back ,after
B's
reInvite, a 503 response,486 and others but with no success.From the
RFC's
(3261 and 3264) I don't seem to see anything related to my problem.Further
there are softphones that when are put on hold,their hold button goes
gray
for saying that hold feature can't be activated.So the question is:
Is there
a way ,standard compliant, that fits my request or we can say that B
phone
is not compliant?
First, why would you want this? I put a call on hold if I don't want to
attend to it right now, and perhaps don't want the audio played out to
me. Once I have done that, I may still be sending audio to you. If you
then also must leave your desk and don't want to attend to the call
right now, why shouldn't you be able to put the call on hold as well.
Whatever bad thing you imagine might be prevented by not permitting you
to put the call on hold will probably still occur if you just walk away
from your phone.
From a practical perspective, as Dale pointed out, there really isn't
anything in sip that *means* "I am putting this call on hold". All there
is are the media directionality attributes in SDP (sendrecv, sendonly,
recvonly, inactive). These don't *mean* hold - they simply stop
undesired media flows. If both ends want the call on hold then
a=inactive is probably appropriate.
Paul
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
