Hi, Jonathan.

 Thank you very much for your comment. I think it will help to refer to this matter in 
the spec (to ensure smoother interoperability).

 Regards,
 Yuko


> It actually doesnt matter if you do or don't copy them. They'll be 
> ignored anyway. Thats why the spec doesnt say.
> 
> -Jonathan R.
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Yuko,
> >       Regarding the response to the re-INVITE, it would
> > be correct to do the same thing: copy the headers from the
> > re-INVITE request to the response. Though the RFC is not
> > explicit in saying this, that is what is assumed.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Subhash.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >                                                                            
> >              Yuko TAKAHASHI                                                
> >              <[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                             
> >              ei.co.jp>                                                  To 
> >                                        [EMAIL PROTECTED]                        
> >              06/30/04 02:58 PM                                          cc 
> >                                        [EMAIL PROTECTED],               
> >                                        [EMAIL PROTECTED],                
> >                                        [EMAIL PROTECTED]    
> >                                                                    Subject 
> >                                        Re: [Sip] Record-Route header field 
> >                                        in re-INVITE transaction            
> >                                                                            
> >                                                                            
> >                                                                            
> >                                                                            
> >                                                                            
> >                                                                            
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  Hi,
> > 
> >  Thank you all for the comments. I do understand that the route set must
> > not be changed by target refresh requests.
> > 
> >  For initial Invite transactions, it says in RFC3261 as follows:
> > -----
> > 12.1.1 UAS behavior
> > 
> >    When a UAS responds to a request with a response that establishes a
> >    dialog (such as a 2xx to INVITE), the UAS MUST copy all Record-Route
> > header field values from the request into the response (including the URIs,
> > URI parameters, and any Record-Route header field parameters, whether they
> > are known or unknown to the UAS) and MUST maintain the order of those
> > values.
> > -----
> > 
> >  But I don't think it's clear for re-INVITE transactions.
> > 
> >  So I meant to ask, should I copy the values from the re-INVITE *without
> > changing the route set*, or should I use the values from the route set
> > learned from the initial INVITE transaction, or doesn't it matter at all?
> > 
> >  Thanks,
> >  Yuko
> > 
> > 
> >>Please address implementation related questions to
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>
> >>The Route set, once established in the initial INVITE, cannot
> >>change in mid-dialog requests. Only the remote target URI can
> >>change during the dialog. Quoting section 12.2 of the RFC:
> >>"...Requests within a dialog MAY contain Record-Route and
> >>Contact header fields.  However, these requests do not cause
> >>the dialog's route set to be modified, although they may modify
> >>the remote target URI."
> >>
> >>- Subhash Nayak.
> >>Hughes Software Systems
> >>http://www.hssworld.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > 
> >>             Yuko TAKAHASHI
> > 
> > 
> >>             <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> >>             ei.co.jp>
> > 
> > To
> > 
> >>             Sent by:                  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> >>             [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > cc
> > 
> >>             org
> > 
> > 
> > Subject
> > 
> >>                                       [Sip] Record-Route header field in
> > 
> > 
> >>             06/30/04 01:36 PM         re-INVITE transaction
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Could anyone help me on the following question?
> >>
> >> If I were to place a Record-Route header field in the 200 OK response to
> > 
> > a
> > 
> >>re-INVITE and the re-INVITE had the header field, which values should I
> >>use? Should I just copy the values from the re-INVITE, or use the route
> > 
> > set
> > 
> >>learned from the initial INVITE transaction, or doesn't it matter at all?
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Yuko Takahashi
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> >>This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> >>Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
> >>Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                600 Lanidex Plaza
> Chief Technology Officer                    Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
> dynamicsoft
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
> http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
> http://www.dynamicsoft.com

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

Reply via email to