The actual text from RFC 3264 says: RFC 2543 [10] specified that placing a user on hold was accomplished by setting the connection address to 0.0.0.0. Its usage for putting a call on hold is no longer recommended, since it doesn't allow for RTCP to be used with held streams, doesn't work with IPv6, and breaks with connection oriented media.
Nothing in there about "uni-directional pausing of media streams", as I read it. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Raj Jain > Sent: 27 April 2007 13:17 > To: varun > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Sip Call Hold > > The advantages are documented in RFC 3264. They are: > > 1. c=0.0.0.0 notion does not support IPv6 2. c=0.0.0.0 > kills RTCP in addition to RTP 3. c=0.0.0.0 does not allow > uni-directional pausing of media streams > > > On 4/27/07, varun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > I think there are two ways to put a call on hold in SIP. > > > > 1> call from user A ->user B. > > User B can send an INVITE with c = 0.0.0.0. > > > > 2> User B can send Sdp with a = sendonly.User A > > responds with a = recv only. > > > > What is the advantage of the second mechanism over the first one. > > > > > > Appreciate your help on this ASAP. > > > > Thanks > > varun > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
