But is it necessary for A to send message with SDP attribute = sendrecv, i mean isnt that supposed to be by default, if i dont send the attribute field when making B off hold
-----Original Message----- From: Ranjit Kumar Avasarala [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 5:07 PM To: Gupta Adetya-A19368; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] for call hold does 200 OK for Re-Invite needs to have a=recvonly yes A should reply with the SDp attribute a=recvonly A replies with SDP attribute a=sendrecv when B removes it off hold (i,e it sends INVITE with SDP attribute a=sendrecv) Ranjit -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Gupta Adetya-A19368 Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 4:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Sip-implementors] for call hold does 200 OK for Re-Invite needs to have a=recvonly Hi All, I have a small doubt ... As per draft-ietf-sipping-services-examples-03 User A & User B are in active call. User B wants to place User A on hold. So User B sends a Re-Invite with attribute parameter in the SDP body as sendonly. As per the above mentioned draft, User A replies with a normal 200 OK. Should not User A reply with a 200 OK, with attribute field in the SDP body as recvonly ? Adetya _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
