Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> Hi, in case of an INVITE with no SDP, how should the request indicate what it
> wants? I think it should include an Accept header:
>
> Accept: Application/sdp
Yes. But I think you can omit it, because any UA that supports INVITE
must support sdp.
> But I wonder if Content-Type is needed (I expect no since there is no body).
C-T is inappropriate without a body.
> What about Content-Disposition header? There is no "Content-type:
> Application/sdp", so maybe "Content-Disposition: session" is required, isn't
> it?
No. The C-D describes the body of the message. It also is innapropriate
without a body. All the Content-* headers are really mime headers, and
are mostly defined in mime RFCs. But some have had their definitions
enhanced by SIP specs.
> Thanks.
>
> PD: Why there is a simple example of an INVITE with no SDP in RFC 3725 "Best
> Current Practices for Third Party Call Control (3pcc)"??
Got me.
Paul
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
