> On 19 Dec 2018, at 09:28, Richard Phernambucq <r.phernamb...@cuperus.nl> > wrote: > > Hi Amarnath, > > A Re-Invite without SDP is called a late offer and isn't the same as resuming > a call that was placed on hold. > > If 'UAS' wanted to resume the call it should have sent an SDP body with > sendrecv attribute. I don’t agree. The UA sending re-invite without SDP is asking the other side “what is your opinion on the state right now.”
Hold is a state that can exist separately on both sides, it doesn’t really apply to the call. /O > > Best regards, > Richard > > > On 19-12-2018 06:28, Amarnath Kanchivanam wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I have below call flow and would like to know the correct behavior. >> >> UAC UAS >> INVITE -----------------> >> <---------------200 OK >> Ack ----------------------> >> >> Now UAS puts call on Hold >> >> <---------------Re-Invite with send-only >> attribute >> 200 OK ----------> recv-only >> <--------------Ack >> >> Now UAS does Un-Hold >> <-------------Re-Invite* without SDP* >> 200 OK ----------> recv-only >> <----------------Ack with SDP >> >> In final Ack there is no SDP attribute (sendrecv or send-only). With this >> call flow UAC failed to Un-Hold and continue to be on hold operation. >> I would like you to share your comments which would help to understand the >> correct behavior. >> >> Regards, >> Amarnath >> _______________________________________________ >> Sip-implementors mailing list >> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
