> Just to confirm, the scenario we are talking about is > > User A <-----> User B established with 2 streams (say) > User A -----> User B re-INVITE Hold both streams > User A <------ User B 200 OK with Hold SDP (2 way hold) > User A -----> User B ACK and session is on hold now. > > NOW... > User A -----> User B a re-INVITE w/o SDP > > Is this correct? > > > If so, I have a feeling I agree with Brett. A response to a > re-INVITE w/o SDP need not have a held SDP even if the UAS > was earlier put on hold. > > REASON: On the list it had earlier been agreed that change > of IP and/or port in ANY offer after the original INVITE > is allowed. In case of responding to a re-INVITE w/o SDP, > the offer is in the 200 OK to this re-INVITE. The UA SHOULD > be allowed to send either of: > > 1. A hold SDP (like the previous 200 OK response that it sent) > if it still wants A to be on hold. > 2. A unhold SDP as this involves only a change of IP (or > media stream) as it may now want User A to come off hold. > > What the UAS MUST NOT do is add a third stream (in addition > to the 2 already accepted originally). It is free to put one > or more of the 2 "originally in use streams" on/off hold. > > Comments please? >
In addition to the above two, the UAS can also send a third new SDP with addition/deletion/modification of new/old/old streams if it intends, as all characteristics of a session can be modified. Comments? Warm regards, --victor _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
