Hi,
 
>> My view on this is that if you don't want to send SDP but you have to
>> when sending a re-INVITE, then send UPDATE without the SDP. Can we
>> update session timer to say that?
>
>I suppose we could, but you can only do that if both sides support
>UPDATE. Since its optional, those who implement session timer must be
>prepared to do it with reINVITE.
>
>I really don't understand the issue here. If you send a reINVITE with
>unchanged SDP and you get back an answer that is changed, just deal with
>it. Why is this a problem?

The problem is when you - for whatever reason - can't deal with it.

Regards,

Christer

 

 

 

> On 21/11/2007, *Paul Kyzivat* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     Christer Holmberg wrote:
>      > Hi,
>      >
>      > What if the offerer is not "prepared" to receive an updated
>     answer (it
>      > only included the "offer" because it had to)? How can it "reject" the
>      > answer?
>
>     It can't. At best it can make a counter offer after the fact, or
>     terminate the call after the fact.
>
>     But that clearly isn't a good policy. You should design your UA so that
>     this isn't an issue. When you make an offer you must always be prepared
>     for the answer be anything that is compatible with the offer.
>
>      > I personally think that an unchanged o- line in the offer should not
>      > allow the answer to change.
>      >
>      > One could of course change the o- line in the offer - even if the
>     offer
>      > itself hasn't changed - and that would then allow the answer to be
>      > changed.
>
>     Personally I think the o-line changing or not is just an extra
>     complication that should never have been there as a factor. Whether the
>     o-line changes or not isn't what matters. What matters is whether the
>     rest of the SDP changes. At best the o-line is a hint about whether the
>     rest changed or not, and simply introduces the potential error case
>     where the SDP doesn't agree with what the o-line is hinting. (So what
>     should you do if the o-line is unchanged but the SDP is changed?)
>
>     But as things are written, you are expected to make the o-line the same
>     if the rest of the SDP is the same. The o-line in the offer has
>     *nothing* to do with what is in the answer.
>
>            Paul
>
>      > Just some thinking...
>      >
>      > Regards,
>      >
>      > Christer
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >> -----Original Message-----
>      >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>     [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>      >> Sent: 20. marraskuuta 2007 3:39
>      >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>      >> Subject: Re: [Sip] SIPit 21: Question about offer answer
>      >>
>      >>    From: Paul Kyzivat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
>      >>
>      >>    A 3pcc controller doing a transfer may well send an
>      >> offerless invite to
>      >>    one UA and then send the offer it gets back to an entirely
>      >> different UA
>      >>    than had been in the session before. So of course the
>      >> answer will be
>      >>    entirely different.
>      >>
>      >> Hmmm, "my" music-on-hold proposal does that, too.
>      >>
>      >> Dale
>      >>
>      >>
>      >> _______________________________________________
>      >> Sip mailing list   https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
>      >> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use
>      >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for questions on current sip
>      >> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for new
>     developments on the application of sip
>      >>
>      >
>      >
>      > _______________________________________________
>      > Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
>      > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
>      > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for questions on current sip
>      > Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for new
>     developments on the application of sip
>      >
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
>     This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
>     Use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for questions on current sip
>     Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for new developments
>     on the application of sip
>
>




_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip

Reply via email to