Dale,
If the NOTIFY arrives out of dialog then I don't think 481 is a suitable
response, unless we also want to overload it further to mean "this
should have been in a dialog".
And of course, the sender, who is sending based on some logic other than
having a dialog, may not treat a 481 as an indication that it should
stop doing this.
Paul
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> From: "Vikram Chhibber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Yes, I agree now. There is no standard that mentions about
> accepting unsolicited NOTIFY. The RFC 3265 mentions establishing
> subscription using non SIP mechanism, the NOTIFY should always be
> received in an existing dialog.
>
> If an unsolicited NOTIFY reached a device that really wasn't expecting
> it, the device would respond with 481, which would tell the sender to
> stop sending NOTIFYs. So I expect that the problem gets corrected
> quickly.
>
> Dale
> _______________________________________________
> 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
