Hi,
I am confused about how a transaction stateful proxy should decide on
forking requests. According to the draft, a transaction stateful proxy will
not hold states through the entire call. Rather it will only remember things
for the duration of the transaction and will treat each transaction as a new
context.
However Rfc-3261 also states
"Unlike an INVITE, which can fork, a re-INVITE will never fork, and
therefore, only ever generate a single final response. The reason a
re-INVITE will never fork is that the Request-URI identifies the target as
the UA instance it established the dialog with, rather than identifying an
address-of-record for the user".
I would like to know, how are we supposed to treat a request, which
arrives at a transaction stateful proxy with only an address of record of
the user and contains a "to-tag" (indicating that it is part of an existing
call/session).
To be specific, What should be done, if we receive the following requests
in a transaction stateful proxy ?
INVITE with "To-tag" and only "address-of-record for the
user"(not-resolved)
BYE with "To-tag" and only "address-of-record for the
user"(not-resolved)
ACK with "To-tag" and only "address-of-record for the
user"(not-resolved)
Should we reject all such requests or Should we treat them as new request
and fork them ?
Thanks,
Bhagat
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
