|
In section 14.2 of rfc 3261, the spec doesnt seem
to talk about
the following scenario:
A UAS hasnt responded yet to an INVITE or a
re-INVITE on the dialog
(or early dialog), and it receives a new
re-INVITE, which is different
from what was pending (ie., higher CSeq no).
The spec forbids the UAC (dialog peer)
from sending a new INVITE before the UAS has responded to the old one, but
in cases of a misbehaving UAC, what response
should be sent to the second INVITE ?
Maybe I am missing some detail. Can someone
clarify this ?
|
- [Sip-implementors] re-invite Romel Khan
- Re: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Ramachandran Iyer
- RE: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Romel Khan
- RE: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Brett Tate
- RE: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Bert Culpepper
- Re: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Ajit Kalele
- Re: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Bob Penfield
- RE: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Medhavi Bhatia
- RE: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Sp.Raja
- Re: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Ajit Kalele
- RE: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Sp.Raja
- Re: [Sip-implementors] re-invite Ajit Kalele
- Re: [Sip-implementors] re-invite stoshniwal
