typo corrected below....

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tolga
> Asveren
> Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 10:58 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] targetURI update semnantics
> forreINVITE/UPDATE
>
>
> To make it more clear:
>
> There is a reINVITE with target refresh. reINVITE is rejected. What should
> be the value of remote URI, the old value or the value in the reINVITE(new
                  ^^^^^^^^^^
                  remote target
> value)?
>
> a)old value
> b) new value
> c) new value as soon as reINVITE is received, and it should be
> reverted back
> to old value when reINVITE is rejected
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tolga
> > Asveren
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 9:42 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [Sip-implementors] targetURI update semnantics for
> > reINVITE/UPDATE
> >
> >
> > When a target refreshing reINVITE is rejected, should the remote
> > URI update
> > be cancelled or not?
> > RFC3261 12.2.2 12.2.2
> > "Requests sent within a dialog, as any other request are atomic. If a
> > particular request is accepted by a UAS, all the state changes
> associated
> > with it are performed. If the request is rejected, none of the
> > state changes
> > are performed."
> > "When a UAS receives a target refresh request, it MUST replace
> > the dialog's
> > remote target URI with the URI from the Contact header field in that
> > request, if present."
> >
> > It is kind of strange IMO, to "reject" a target refresh. I can see that
> > reINVITE is rejected because of media offer is not accepted but "target
> > referesh" is different in nature. Rather than asking/offering UAS
> > something,
> > it is more a declaration that remote target info has changed,
> so I tend to
> > think, even reINVITE(or UPDATE) is rejected, remote target should not be
> > reverted back to original.
> >
> > For example for UPDATE, there are different scenarios, where an
> UPDATE has
> > to be rejected (e.g. a UAS receives an UPDATE before it has generated a
> > finbal response to a previous UPDATE). What to do in such cases? Keeping
> > remote target updated or not? Even in such a case, it sounds
> > strange to me,
> > not to "accept" the new remote target information.
> >
> >
> >   Tolga
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to