https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sipping-sip-offeranswer
neil corcoran wrote: > Hi, > > In an established session we receive a re-INVITE with an SDP offer > we respond with a 200 with an SDP answer > and the far end sends an ACK with a copy of the original SDP offer > which is out of the ordinary for our software and caused our end to crash. > I am inclined to pretend that the SDP in the ACK never existed and carry on. > I've been checking RFC3261 for clarification but couldn't see anything > definitive on this. > Is ignoring it the correct thing to do? > > Regards, > > Neil > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
