Just read section 6.1 . 
Should the attribute be missing in the answer, it implicitly means sendrecv,
i.e. it is forbidden!

Andrea

-----Original Message-----
From: David Benoit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: mercoledì 27 giugno 2007 16.21
To: Andrea Rizzi
Cc: 'varun'; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Call hold and a = inactive

Option 3 is definitely legal for clients that were written before RFC 3254
existed as it is the default value (i.e. if B sends A "sendonly" and A
responds with no state, it defaults to "sendrecv").

Please tell me specifically what part of RFC 3264 you mean when you said
it is forbidden as I can find no reference to that.

Thanks,

David

On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 03:51:41PM +0200, Andrea Rizzi wrote:
> Option 3 is forbidden by RFC3264!
> 
> Andrea
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Benoit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: mercoled? 27 giugno 2007 15.20
> To: varun
> Cc: Andrea Rizzi; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Call hold and a = inactive
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The exchange of the activation state can be thought of like the following
> conversation (which may aid in the understanding):
> 
> User B wants to put A on hold so it sends "sendonly" to A:
>   - Hey A, I'm not going to send you any media for a while, so please
>     don't think that the call is dead because of that.  I'll let you know
>     when I'm back.
> 
> In response to that, A has a number of options.
> 
> Option 1: User A sends back "recvonly":
>   - Hey B, thanks for telling me that.  I won't send you any media until
>     you tell me otherwise, but I will still pay attention to anything you
>     send to me.
> 
> Option 2: User A sends back "inactive":
>   - Hey B, thanks.  It you aren't going to listen, I'm not going to listen
>     either.  Let me know when you want to talk again.
> 
> Option 3: User A sends back "sendrecv":
>   - Hey B, thanks for telling me that, but I don't really care.  I'm not
>     going to kill your call because you don't send me any media.  I will
>     still send you media and you can just ignore it.  You can still send
>     me media and I'll pay attention to it.
> 
> 
> It is not really clear which of the options should be chosen in all
> cases.  And all of these options are valid and legal responses.
> 
> For option 1, this means that media won't be flowing from A to B, but as
> soon as B wants to start sending media again, it will be accepted by A
> even before the "off hold" exchange happens.
> 
> For option 2, no media should flow between A and B or visa versa.
> However, this means that some clients may not accept any media from the
> other side until the state changes, meaning the completion of the "off
> hold" exchange would have to happen before media was accepted.  This is
> sometimes problematic if there is more delay in the signaling (either from
> the path or the processing) than there is for the media.  This is a real
> problem on a lot of networks, so be careful.
> 
> Option 3 is more like option 1 than 2.  As B should really "discard" any
> media it receives after sending out the "sendonly" (as it has said to A "I
> don't want your media"), it is actually okay that A keeps sending to B.
> It only "wastes" bandwidth.  However, in some cases the A may be a piece
> of equipment not capable of setting this particular option (either because
> it is old, incorrect, etc.).
> 
> So, this isn't really a prescription for what you should do.  If you are a
> UA (i.e. a client)  I would tend toward option 1.  It has the least chance
> of introducing any type of problem where the media from B will get lost
> when B takes the call off hold.
> 
> David
> 
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 05:46:51AM -0700, varun wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have still not got a complete answer.
> > Case1: Putting a call on hold by using send only(Party
> > A) and the other end(Party B) reposning by recvonly ,
> > this case still has one directional media path
> > open(From A->B).
> > What is the case when the other end(Party B) responds
> > with a = inactive...
> > does it mean no media path in both directions or same
> > as case 1( one way media from A->B)/.
> > Please reply ASAP.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > varun
> > --- Andrea Rizzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> > > There are no violations at all in responding with
> > > inactive, and as you
> > > mentioned this will suspend any media, as the
> > > holding procedure is
> > > definitively a new offer/answer exchange. 
> > > Actually, in my opinion, this would be the preferred
> > > way to implement the
> > > call hold service, to save bandwidth, of course by
> > > guessing that the
> > > terminal responding with inactive is able to play a
> > > locally-generated hold
> > > tone. Moreover, I've seen very few holding terminals
> > > sending content (as a
> > > hold tone or music) over RTP after a
> > > sendonly/recvonly exchange.
> > > 
> > > Andrea
> > > 
> > > ------------------------------
> > > 
> > > Message: 7
> > > Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:14:01 -0700 (PDT)
> > > From: varun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Subject: [Sip-implementors] Call hold and a =
> > > inactive
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Message-ID:
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> > > 
> > > Hi,
> > > If user B wants to put user A on Hold, it can send a
> > > =
> > > sendonly to A and expects A to return a = recvonly.
> > > This way there is a one way audio channel open from
> > > B
> > > to A.
> > > What if user A responds with a = inactive..is that
> > > valid? Does it mean that media streams are on Hold
> > > in
> > > both directions?
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > varun
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > >
> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >        
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> > Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo!
> FareChase.
> > http://farechase.yahoo.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> 
> -- 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Principal Software Engineer | +1-902-832-2649
>  "Complex problems have simple, neat and wrong solutions" - H. L. Menken

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Principal Software Engineer | +1-902-832-2649
 "Complex problems have simple, neat and wrong solutions" - H. L. Menken


_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to