On 09/30/2010 10:46 AM, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote: > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of > [email protected] [[email protected]] > > I am some doubt regarding the RFC4566. > > If you see the red marked attribute this same attribute is getting repeated > in the SDP. > I just want to confirm, is this acceptable behavior? > ________________________________________ > > According to the principle of "Be strict in what you send and lenient in what > you accept", sending two lines that say "a=rtpmap:98 AMR/8000/1" should not > be done, but the receiver should accept them and interpret them to mean that > payload type number 98 is "AMR/8000/1".
To add to what Dale said... if the sender had sent two "a=rtpmap:98" lines that did not have the same contents, the behavior of the receiver is undefined, as the sender is not RFC compliant. The receiver could choose to accept the first one, the second one, or neither, or even reject the entire request. This does not mean, though, that the receiver is obligated to watch for duplicated "a=rtpmap" lines and verify that they match. It *can* do so, but it can also treat the second one the same as it would if the contents did not match the first one. As Dale said, though, it's not costly to confirm that the second one does in fact match the first one, and accepting the duplicate line is not harmful. -- Kevin P. Fleming Digium, Inc. | Director of Software Technologies 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA skype: kpfleming | jabber: [email protected] Check us out at www.digium.com & www.asterisk.org _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business. Use [email protected] for questions on how to develop a SIP implementation. Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip. Use [email protected] for issues related to maintenance of the core SIP specifications.
