Frank Shearar wrote: > draft-ietf-sipping-cc-transfer section 5 tells us that we can use GRUUs to > associate an out-of-dialog REFER to an INVITE dialog usage. > > Using that same logic, could one do the same with a BYE? That is, if I've > set up a call using a GRUU (*) and I receive an out-of-dialog BYE sent to > that GRUU. Should I just drop the BYE saying "sorry, 481"? Should I accept > the BYE as being "equivalent" to an in-dialog BYE (in the sense that an > in-dialog REFER and an out-of-dialog REFER are equivalent: doing the same > thing)?
No, because the logic isn't the same. Neither the in-dialog REFER nor the out-of-dialog REFER directly affect the INVITE-usage of the dialog. An in-dialog BYE clearly does affect the INVITE-usage of the dialog! Using GRUUs or otherwise is irrelevant in this context - GRUUs simple ensure that out-of-dialog messages can be delivered to the right endpoint, a problem that in-dialog messages don't have. > REFER uses Target-Dialog as a means of authorising the request, so what if > one received an out-of-dialog BYE targetting one's call's GRUU, with > Target-Dialog? The Target-Dialog is used to say 'I know about this other dialog', not to say 'I should have sent this message in this other dialog'. > I'm tempted to just say "it's not an in-dialog BYE; reject it"; after all, > RFC 3261 says And I would be tempted to agree with both you and the RFC on this point! An out-of-dialog BYE should be rejected. Regards, Michael Procter _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
