Do you mean re-INVITE (the term putting 'on hold' makes sense only for an established session) ?
Though it is no longer recommended, A's behaviour seem OK, as far as the port number in its answer is non-zero. Excerpt from RFC 3264: "An agent MUST be capable of receiving SDP with a connection address of 0.0.0.0, in which case it means that neither RTP nor RTCP should be sent to the peer." Muthu On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:03:12 +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > hello, > > Suppose A is calling B and B keeps A on hold. B sends INVITE with the > connection address containing 0.0.0.0.But when A sends 200 Ok to B it > sends with its own connection address but not 0.0.0.0. is it a correct > behaviour of A? > > regards, > sangeetha > > Confidentiality Notice > > The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to > this message are intended > for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential or > privileged information. If > you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender at Wipro or > [EMAIL PROTECTED] immediately > and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. > _______________________________________________ > 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
