> The problem you are describing appears to be > related to - but not the same as - HERFP.
I agree. Unless a solution is desired before HERFP, there isn't much reason for them to progress separately. > I am not aware of any draft that addresses this. It is presented within Figure 10 of Jonathan's HERFP solution. http://www.jdrosen.net/papers/draft-rosenberg-sip-unify-00.txt > My first thought is that the UA should be conservative in > presenting responses to the user, it could show "progress" > but not popup a message saying "person X is answering...", > to avoid getting the user's hopes up too high too early I was mainly referring to interactions associated with forking and early media. However I see reason in preventing the caller from acting upon the various early dialogs. A -- P -- X -- Y X returns 183 with SDP. Y returns 180 without SDP. The X leg is terminated by P or X. It would be beneficial if P could easily communicate this to A. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
