> Back in November of 2002, there was a discussion > of whether or not the 200-OK for a CANCEL should > have a to-tag. I reviewed the thread and it > appears to me the consensus was that they should > have to-tags in accordance with RFC 3261. However, > none of the CANCEL examples in RFC 3665 have to-tags > in the 200-OK response to the CANCEL. > > Was it decided that CANCEL responses do not need > to-tags?
The CANCEL's to-tag must match the to-tag of the event being cancelled. If the INVITE contained a to-tag, the CANCEL must contain a to-tag. If the INVITE did not contain a to-tag, the CANCEL must not contain a to-tag. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
