Thanks for your quick response. I think this scenario is useful in cases
where all the digits are not known and the INVITE is sent. Additional digits
can be send in INFO message. But if I am building a UA for an end terminal
user, then it should not receive INFO in such cases. What do you say in this
case?  How should I take in my UA call model?

- sarju


----- Original Message -----
From: Christer Holmberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Sarju Garg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 2:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Use of INFO before sending ACK


>
> Hi,
>
> There was a discussion on this some time ago, and the general
> understanding is that it IS allowed to send INFO before the UAC has
> received the 200 OK response and sent the ACK.
>
> However, unless the UAC has received a 18x provisional response, with a
> To header tag and Contact header to use in the INFO, it can NOT assume
> that proxis will handle/route an INFO in the same way as the INVITE. For
> this reason it may (depending on the scenario you want to use INFO for)
> be better if the UAS sends a 18x provisional response, instead of 100
> Trying, when it receives the INVITE, to make sure the UAC gets the To
> tag and Contact header as soon as possible. They are also needed if the
> UAC wants to terminate the specific call setup leg using BYE.
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer Holmberg
> Ericsson Finland
>
>
> Sarju Garg wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > If the user sends a message that is not expected during the call state
> > ,then how should UA behave to this message? FOr example if the calling
> > side UA sends INFO while the call is being established (UA sends
> > INVITE and then INFO without waiting to send ACK first), then how the
> > does called side UA interpret this INFO message.  There are 3
> > possibilites:
> > 1. Ignore it, will be retransmitted after sometime
> > 2. Save it, send 1xx message and process it after receiving ACK
> > 3. Send 409 message saying that this message is received at wrong
> > time.
> >
> > To me, 2 seems to be the right option. Please let me know which would
> > be the correct behavior.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Sarju
>

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to