On Fri, 2008-06-06 at 15:41 -0400, Jeremy Geras wrote: > Thanks. > > Yeah, we looked at draft-worley-service-example-01, but concluded that > it won't work for us because it doesn't allow the endpoint that is > being put on hold to reject the music. (For example, a softphone that > acts as a local audio mixer for a 3 party conference call -- if one of > the participants tries to put the conference mixing UA on hold, we > want to respond with appropriate SDP such that they are *not* allowed > to send hold music to the conference).
but in that case, the conference mixer is the held party. If you're building the mixer, and my phone uses the method in Dale's draft, you get the music. It seems to me that what you want is an indication in the reINVITE that tells you it's hold audio in that stream so that you can either reject it or at least no mix it into the conference. One of the advantages of the method we prefer is that it requires less from the held party - it has been our experience that it's easier to deploy because of that. -- Scott Lawrence tel:+1.781.229.0533;ext=162 or sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] sipXecs project coordinator - SIPfoundry http://www.sipfoundry.org/sipXecs CTO, Voice Solutions - Bluesocket Inc. http://www.bluesocket.com/ http://www.pingtel.com/ _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
