> Would it be incorrect to use the term b2bua > to refer to a UAC-UAC concatenation?
If the mentioned UAC endpoints truly never act as a UAS within a given dialog, b2buac would be the better definition. However to truly satisfy such a definition would be rare since it would need to drop incoming requests traversing the dialog or provide a Contact of another device to ensure that it would not need to act as a UAS. Note that a 3pcc b2bua which intends to reject all dialog related incoming requests with something like a 405 or 403 is still acting a UAS when it rejects the requests. Thus it would still be considered a b2bua instead of a b2buac. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
