El Thursday 15 May 2008 16:01:44 Paul Kyzivat escribió: > *If* it is known that the dialog only had a single usage (the normal > case) then it provides *some* evidence of the continued existence of > that usage. But it is in general impossible to know there was a single > usage. For instance, a REFER may have been sent within the dialog, > resulting in a refer subscription usage sharing the dialog. Then the > INVITE-usage could have gone away leaving only the refer subscription > within the dialog. An OPTIONS at that time would still conclude that the > dialog existed even though the INVITE did not. This would typically not > be a problem since the INVITE, REFER, and OPTIONS are typically all sent > by the same entity, but that depends upon application design.
Ok, so in the case of a softswitch (which probably doesn't handle/allow REFER and so) the usage of OPTIONS in-dialog could be perfectly valid according to RFC 3261/5057, isn't? Thanks a lot. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
