Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/Answer questionHi All,
As per rfc 3311 , update is used for early media (early dialog) .
As per my understanding , early dialog means the 200 OK has been not recvd for
the INVITE.
Please tell me whether ReInvite cannot be used for this Particular case.
Thanks and Regards
Rajesh Kumar
Sr. Software Engineer
R & D - Network Group
+91 40 23555945 - 235
+91 99084 00027
www.imimobile.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Manpreet Singh
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: [SIPForum-discussion] [Sip-implementors] Offer/Answer question
Agree with session refresh(without o/a in specific). Makes call flow
simplistic and in lots of cases avoids interoperability issues caused due to
o/a wth re-invites
Thnx
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Manpreet Singh
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
<sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu>
Sent: Mon Apr 14 09:30:57 2008
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/Answer question
Manpreet Singh wrote:
> That's one reason why I have seen most implementations use re-invites
instead of updates for mid call changes. Why leave a possibility of 2
transactions when one can live with 1. But then its implementation specific :-)
Sometimes the call flow won't work right if a human delay is inserted in
it. In that case UPDATE is ideal because it prevents that eventuality.
The 3pcc call flow RFC (I forget the number) is getting a bit long in
the tooth now, but it it talks about some cases with that kind of
constraint.
UPDATE is also useful without o/a for session timer refresh.
Paul
> Thnx
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brett Tate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Manpreet Singh
> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu <sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu>
> Sent: Mon Apr 14 09:04:10 2008
> Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] Offer/Answer question
>
> I agree with Paul; however I'll highlight the rfc3311 section 5.2 text
> concerning UPDATE with SDP potentially triggering a 504. Thus UAC
> receiving 504 for UPDATE with SDP should be aware that a re-INVITE might
> be needed to perform the SDP modification.
>
> "If the UAS cannot change the session parameters without prompting the
> user, it SHOULD reject the request with a 504 response."
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Paul Kyzivat
>> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 12:34 AM
>> To: Manpreet Singh
>> Cc: Bob Penfield; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
>> sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
>> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/Answer question
>>
>>
>>
>> Manpreet Singh wrote:
>>> Wasn't denying the use of update on confirmed dialog, just
>> saying the
>>> recommended use of UPDATE is for early dialog and not for confirmed
>>> based on the spec.
>>>
>>> ""Although UPDATE can be used on confirmed dialogs, it is
>> RECOMMENDED
>>> that a re-INVITE be used instead. This is because an UPDATE
>> needs to
>>> be answered immediately, ruling out the possibility of user
>> approval.
>>> Such approval will frequently be needed, and is possible with a
>>> re-INVITE.""
>> IMO the "denial" is a bit overstated. It is only pointing out
>> that its inappropriate if the offer it carries will require
>> an extended time for approval before being answered. If that
>> isn't to be the case then there isn't any issue with using UPDATE.
>>
>> Note that the issue with immediate response also applies to
>> an UPDATE used during an early dialog.
>>
>> Paul
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
This is the SIP Forum discussion mailing list
TO UNSUBSCRIBE, or edit your delivery options, please visit
http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Post to the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
