When should a 406 (Not Acceptable) be sent verse a 488 (Not Acceptable
Here)?
the UPDATE draft mentions
an update could be reject a codec change with a 488,
the bis9 draft mentions
a Re-INVITE codec change is rejected with a 406 or a 488?
thanks,
mike feldman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
bis9 page 18, section 4:
This is accomplished by sending a re-INVITE containing a new media
description. This
re-INVITE references the existing dialog so that the other party knows that
it is to
modify an existing session instead of establishing a new session. The other
party
sends a 200 (OK) to accept the change. The requestor responds to the 200
(OK) with an
ACK. If the other party does not accept the change, he sends an error
response such as
406 (Not Acceptable), which also receives an ACK.
but bis 9 in section 14.2 page 90:
If the new session description is not acceptable, the UAS can reject it by
returning a 488 (Not Acceptable Here) response to the re-invite.
draft-ietf-sip-update-02, section 5.2:
If the new session description is not acceptable, the UAS can reject it by
returning a
488 (Not Acceptable Here) response for the UPDATE.
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
