Hi, I personally think that there should be at most one outstanding target refresh transaction at any point, and that the UPDATE therefor should not be allowed in your example.
No, I don't know whether it's said somewhere, but in that case it's probably also one thing we should fix in the 3261-fix. We HAVE had a discussion whether 18x should be allowed for a re-INVITE in the first place, regarding an offer/answer issue (what happens if the 18x carries an answer, but then the re-INVITE fails). Regards, Christer > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12. huhtikuuta 2007 14:18 > To: Sonja Belic > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] UPDATE and reINVITE > > Hi Sonja, > > I think that which ever request has higher C-Seq number, the > contact in that request should be taken as dialogs remote target. > > With Regards > Raghu > > > > > Sonja Belic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 04/12/2007 03:56 PM > > > To > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > cc > > Subject > [Sip-implementors] UPDATE and reINVITE > > > > > > > > Hi, > I have a question regarding UPDATE and reINVITE. > > A B > > INVITE (C1) > |-------------------------------------->| // C = Contact > 180 > |<--------------------------------------| > 200 OK (INVITE) > |<--------------------------------------| > ACK > |-------------------------------------->| > target > reINVITE (C2) > |-------------------------------------->| > 1xx > |<--------------------------------------| > UPDATE (C3) > |-------------------------------------->| > 200 OK (UPDATE) > |<--------------------------------------| > 200 OK (reINVITE) > |<--------------------------------------| > ACK > |-------------------------------------->| > > > Q: Is it OK for UPDATE to be sent when reINVITE isn't actually > responded with the final response? And what will be the dialog remote > target C2 or C3? According to RFC3311, I presume that 200 OK to > reINVITE should have the same Contact as UPDATE or its response. > > > > Best Regards > Sonja > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > > > > *********************** Aricent-Unclassified > *********************** > "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is > intended solely for the use of > the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain > privileged or confidential information and should not be > circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is > intended. If you have received this message in error, > please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the > intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly > prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the > contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for > loss or damage arising from the use of the information > transmitted by this email including damage from virus." > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
