From: Scott Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 16:59 -0500, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > In those cases where an intermediate node wants to interfere in the e2e > CC behavior, why doesn't it act as a B2BUA? IMO this is a case where > that could be appropriate.
I agree - a 'proxy' (the real meaning of proxy, not a b2bua) shouldn't mess with this. The example you give doesn't really stand up - a proxy can't really be a very interesting ACD; it needs to be a b2bua to do much of what real users expect of an ACD. Yes, I suppose that's true -- in any case that's complicated enough that the middle device would want to explicitly manipulate call completion, the middle device would be a B2BUA already. Dale _______________________________________________ BLISS mailing list [email protected] http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
