Paul,
see inline.
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Paul Kyzivat
Sent: Thu 5/31/2007 1:44 PM
To: anurag gupta
Cc: sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] sip offer-answer in session modification
anurag gupta wrote:
> I am having a confusion regarding the offer answer model in case
> of session modification. The situation is like: Two parties is
> involved in an audio session and now one party sends a RE-INVITE containing
> audio and video stream, but the peer accepts the video stream and
> rejects the audio stream. Now, what will be final session parameters. Is
> the session going to change into a video session or will be remain as
> audio session.
If I understand, in the initial INVITE there was one m-line for audio
with non-zero port in both offer and answer.
Then, in reINVITE there was an additional m-line for video added in the
offer, with non-zero ports for both m-lines. The reINVITE succeeds (200)
and the answer has two m-lines, with the first (audio) having the port
set to zero, while the second (video) has a non-zero port.
If that is what you meant, then yes, there will then be only video.
OTOH, if the UAS for the reINVITE rejected it with some 4xx response
then the audio session would have remained, unchanged from the initial
INVITE.
>>AP
Do you mean any 4xx is treated as a failure of Re-INVITE transaction only with
earlier state retained ?
In practise if a 487(call leg does not exist) or any such *fatal* error is
received, the call should be torn
down IMO, For example, in the above case the audio session would have been torn
down immediately
with a BYE on receiving a 487.
thanks
Arun
Paul
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
