> Certainly the motivation for the existing wording was to > accommodate REFER, and I suppose similar arrangements.
Yes; and subscriptions created through configuration (section 3.2.2). > NOTIFYs that don't contain a to-tag don't identify an > expected dialog, so I don't think they are consistent > with a dialog established by other means. For backwards compatibility with rfc2543 devices, dialogs can exist without tags. For Replaces, RFC3891 defaults such situations as tag=0. If REFER sent over dialog by rfc2543 device that didn't include tag during call setup, the NOTIFY will not contain a To tag. I only raise this point because it is the way I see that a NOTIFY without a To tag complies with rfc3265. :) _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
