> > >>>"When a forking proxy receives a non-2xx final response which >>>terminates one or more (if forking has occured downstream a final >>>response received by the forking proxy MAY terminate multiple early >>>dialogs), and the proxy does not intend to forward the final >response >>>immedialetly (due to the rules for a forking proxy), >and >>>the UAC has indicated support of the 199 response code, the proxy >>>SHOULD generate and send a 199 response upstream for the early dialog >on which the >>>non-2xx final response was received, unless the proxy has previously >>>recieved and forwarded a 199 response for the dialog." >> >>Wow! We really must shorten this sentence. In particular I don't like >>including a second normative sentence in parentheses within the main >>sentence. > >I can try to think of more simple wording. > >And, text suggestions are of course always welcome :)
Along the same lines, I found text about support for 100rel also confusing. I think the preference is that this response be not sent reliably, though the normative strength is slightly week for UAS as compared to a forking proxy. I think it should be simplified and just say that 100rel option does not have significance for this. As an addition, it will also simplify it's association with offer-answer exchange (fact that 199 should have offer sdp for delayed media Invite) Sanjay _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.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
