See section 5 of RFC 6337. It covers exactly this point.
If you don't do something like what is described there you run a risk of
getting into a situation where you can't get out of hold state.
Thanks,
Paul
On 10/14/11 1:28 AM, deepak bansal wrote:
> Hi Tarun,
>
> Please help on below scenario:
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> B now has one RTP stream (Port1) marked as INACTIVE, due to HOLD initiated
> by A
>
> a) Should it send 1 "m" line in SDP, send offer on RTP stream Port1 (making
> it as SENDRECV) with full Caps.
> (In this case I am worried about the session that was put ON-HOLD by A)
>
> OR
>
> b) Should it send 2 "m" lines in SDP
> One with Port1 INACTIVE (i.e previous SDP that was send)
> 2nd with Port2 sendrecv with Full Capabilities
> (In this case I am worried whether i Can create two RTP Audio streams
> one INACTIVE and other SENDRECV)
>
> EXAMPLE
> ----------------
>
> A ------------------------ (Controller) -------------------- B
>
> C
>
> 1) A and B are on Call
> 2) A initiated HOLD by pressing flash HOOK (so B is now on HOLD)
> 3) A establish Call with C
> 4) A goes On Hook
> 5) Controller does not Pass this to B instead it sends INVITE without offer
> to B
>
> SO B was on HOLD with previous SDP that it has send towards controller
> (inactive)
> Now it has received SDP without Offer, so how should B behave.
>
>
> Best Regards
> Deepak
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Tarun2 Gupta<tarun2.gu...@aricent.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Deepak
>>
>> The scenario is perfectly valid. Refer RFC 3725 for more such examples. A
>> is using ReInvite without SDP to elicit a new offer from B. Yes, B can send
>> new offer with full capabilities in 200 OK.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tarun Gupta
>> Aricent
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:
>> sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of deepak bansal
>> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 10:09 AM
>> To: sip-implementors
>> Subject: [Sip-implementors] Query of receiving re-INVITE without offer
>>
>> User A and User B are on HOLD (User A has initiated HOLD by sending
>> (inactive))
>> User B now receives a re-INVITE without offer from User A, then should B
>> respond with offer in 200 OK ??
>>
>> Is this a VALID Scenario,
>> If it is yes what should be send by B in SDP Body of 200OK.
>> a) Previously SDP response that it has sent in 200 OK (inactive))
>> 2) Can B send offer with (sendrecv mode) with full capabilities?
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sip-implementors mailing list
>> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ===============================================================================
>> Please refer to http://www.aricent.com/legal/email_disclaimer.html
>> for important disclosures regarding this electronic communication.
>>
>> ===============================================================================
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
