This isn't compatible with the current approach because in the current
approach *every* INVITE or UPDATE impacts the session timer, either by
renegotiating it or by turning it off.
Paul
Harsha. R wrote:
> Brett,
>
>> An outstanding session-expires mechanism should not prevent another from
>> occurring. However there is a potential for race conditions concerning
>> knowing if UPDATE sent/received prior to INVITE 200 response.
>
> Why cant this be addressed say using something like the SDP
> offer/answer semantics?
> a subsequent session refresh cant be made unless the previous request
> has been answered?
>
> Regards
> Harsha
> _______________________________________________
> 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
