Paul Kyzivat wrote: > > > Maxim Sobolev wrote: >> Paul Kyzivat wrote: >>> >>> Dale Worley wrote: >>>> On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 13:32 +0530, Nabam Serbang wrote: >>>>> 1) If the offer being presented in 2xx (200 OK) for INVITE is not >>>>> acceptable >>>>> by UAC, what would be the valid answer in that ACK? Remember this not >>>>> re-INVITE which will have prior SDP. >>>> No doubt you can take the SDP in the 200, modify in slightly in a few >>>> places, and convert it into an SDP answer that is value *with >>>> respect to >>>> the SDP offer*. Of course, since you are going to terminate the dialog >>>> immediately, it does not matter if the SDP answer has any relationship >>>> to the capabilities of the UA itself. >>> >>> For instance, put 0.0.0.0 in a c= line. Then copy all the m-lines but >>> set all the port numbers to zero. Put in valid value for o-line and >>> any others that just must be there, and nothing else. >> >> Putting port number 0 into m-line should be just enough. Port number >> of 0 means that the stream has been rejected. Any sensible UAC should >> send a BYE upon receipt of such SDP answer immediately. > > You need to have all the required lines, which includes c=, o=, and some > others I forget.
Yes, but my point is that you can put the rest of fields as usually. In fact, putting 0.0.0.0 has a chance of causing unexpected results as some pre-RFC3264 UAs put 0.0.0.0 when they want other party to be in the send-only mode, therefore when both port is 0 and address is 0.0.0.0 some devices may consider it as a request to be in the sendonly mode, not as a rejected stream. Regards, -- Maksym Sobolyev Sippy Software, Inc. Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts T/F: +1-646-651-1110 Web: http://www.sippysoft.com MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: SippySoft _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
