Mere semantics, I guess. There is no reason why you should reject or ignore a request with CSeq incremented by two either. I think the MUST in the RFC is there for a practical reason. Why increment by two if you can increment by one with exactly the same effect. Unless of course there's a more logical reason why two is more appropriate than one.
Joegen Bob Penfield wrote: >Section 12.2.1.1 of RFC 3261 says "... if the local sequence number is not >empty, the value of the local sequence number MUST be incremented by one, >and this value MUST be placed into the CSeq header field. If the local >sequence number is empty, an initial value MUST be chosen using the >guidelines of Section 8.1.1.5." > >The CSeq MUST be incremented by 1. > >cheers, >(-:bob > >Robert F. Penfield >Chief Software Architect >Acme Packet, Inc. >71 Third Avenue >Burlington, MA 01803 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Uttam Kumar Sarkar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "'Bob Penfield'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Sreejesh" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Sip-Implementors" ><[email protected]> >Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 10:46 AM >Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] Requests within a Dialog > > > > >>The CSeq should be incremented but not necessarily by 1. >>Thanks, >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Bob Penfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 10:41 AM >>To: Sreejesh; Sip-Implementors >>Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Requests within a Dialog >> >> >>A dialog is identified by the Call-ID, from-tag, and to-tag. Any request >>within an existing dialog must include the to-tag. The CSeq should >>increment >> >>by 1 for each new request. >> >>See section 12.2 of RFC 3261. >> >>http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3261.txt >> >>cheers, >>(-:bob >> >>Robert F. Penfield >>Chief Software Architect >>Acme Packet, Inc. >>71 Third Avenue >>Burlington, MA 01803 >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Sreejesh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>To: "Sip-Implementors" <[email protected]> >>Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 10:00 AM >>Subject: [Sip-implementors] Requests within a Dialog >> >> >> >> >>>GlacierHi All, >>> >>>I have some doubts regarding sending Requests within an ongoing >>>Dialog. >>> >>>1. Can dialog creation methods [REFER,INVITE] be sent within an >>>existing >>>Dialog. >>>2. If so, should the To Tag be present or it should be left out in the >>>Request. >>>3. What should the value of the CSeq number be: >>> a. any random value >>> b. incremented monotonically over the previous CSeq number in >>>the Dialog. >>> >>>Any input on this would be greatly appreciated. >>> >>>Regards, >>>Sreejesh >>>_______________________________________________ >>>Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] >>>https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors >>> >>> >>> >>_______________________________________________ >>Sip-implementors mailing list >>[email protected] >>https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors >> >> >> >> >>NOTE: This message, including any attachments, may include privileged, >>confidential and/or inside information. Any distribution or use of this >>communication by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly >>prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, >>please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it >>from >>your system. Thank you. >> >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Sip-implementors mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > > > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
