> Suppose a session-timer of 30 minutes duration > has been negotiated between two UAs. > A session-expires value of 30 minutes was > negotiated and UA1 is the refresher. > UA1 starts a timer of value 15 minutes and > UA2 starts a timer of value 30 > minutes minus 10 seconds, as per the > recommendations in the spec. > > Now 10 minutes after the first INVITE > negotiation, UA1 sends a re-INVITE > (not a timer refresh) to UA2 in order > (to negotiate a codec change, put > party on-hold etc.) and added the > Session-Expires header with the same value > that was previously negotiated (30 minutes). > > For some reason, the re-INVITE was rejected > with some 4xx/5xx response (something other > than 408 and 481). What should the UAC do now?
Assuming the re-invite was not important, the call stays up. If the failure response should trigger a subsequent request (401, 407, ...), the UAC should act accordingly. > What happens to the previously negotiated value > of Session-Timer? It is still timing. Because the re-invite failed, it does not alter the previously negotiated timing. > As per my understanding, if the response to > a re-INVITE with a Session-Expires header is > not a 2xx with a session_expires header, the > session timer is cancelled. Is this correct? No. A non-2xx final response to a re-invite does not alter the current session timing. A 2xx without session-expires means the session timer is cancelled. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
