On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 14:28 -0400, Jeremy Geras wrote: > The advantage of sipping-service-examples-14 is that it starts with a > 'sendonly' offer to the held party (F5 in the flow in section 2.3). > This gives the held party the opportunity to send back an 'inactive' > answer. And on receipt of this the UA invoking the hold operation can > just forget about doing MoH.
In a way, this discussion illustrates a problem we all have as SIP development engineers... we think it's reasonable for UAs to express intentions and make good decisions. One UA should be able to say "I'm going to send you annoying hold audio now" so that the other one can decide not to play it to the user. The problem is that the owners of the businesses that buy the systems that send the annoying audio want it to be played because it's advertising or some other form of brainwashing - so they don't want the systems to have the information needed to make any other choice (just as tv stations don't send any data about which part of the video is advertisements). -- 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
