> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Brett Tate > Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 5:14 PM > To: 'Jeroen van Bemmel' > Cc: 'sip-implementors' > Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] forking proxy indicating > thatearlydialogreleased > > > > 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
Sorry. "I see reason" should be "I see no reason". > 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 > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
