Right. RFC 3891 says so ... 3891 section 3 -> If the Replaces header field matches an early dialog that was not initiated by this UA, it returns a 481 (Call/Transaction Does Not Exist) response to the new INVITE, and leaves the matched dialog unchanged.
Please go thought this link https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/sip-implementors/2009-May/022614 .html -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Naarumanchi Kaushik Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 3:10 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Sip-implementors] Reg. Replaces header with REFER. Hi All, RFC 3891 says: "A UAC MUST NOT send an INVITE with a Replaces header field that attempts to replace an early dialog which was not originated by the target of the INVITE with a Replaces header field" For the following scenario: Alice Bob Devis | Initiates & establishes call | | |<===================>| | | Initiates call | | |<================================> | | | | |----------REFER/200------------->| | |<--NOTIFY/200(trying)----------|-INV w/Replaces->| Here Alice is the initiator for both the calls. After receiving REFER from Alice, when Bob sends an INVITE with Replaces header, Should Devis reject this call with 481 as he is not the originator of the call with Alice? And should the call transfer be considered as failed? Regards, N.V.S.Kaushik. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
