see comments inline
>  
>    Hi All,
>    
>    I have few queries about Session Timer mechanism (RFC 4028), please 
> clarify it.
>    Thanks in advance.
>    
>   1) If in the initial session establishment (INVITE  200 OK   ACK), there 
> was no session timer info got exchanged and  both the end points (User 
> Agents) supports Session Timer. 
>    
>   If Session-Expires header is present in Re-INVITE/UPDATE message, what will 
> be the behaviour of User Agent ??                                 
>       A) Allow to negotiate    B) Ignore it  
>       
>     >> Allowing User Agent to negotiate session interval, looks like ok.
>          Is there is any rela time scenario ??   
The last paragraph of section 7.2 of RFC 4028 basically states that any 
INVITE/UPDATE request received after a dialog has been established AND 
contains the
Session-Expires header must be processed according to the procedures of 
the RFC. So in that case the session timer mechanism will be negotiated.
>     
>    
>   2) If support for Session Timer (ST) is not enabled at User Agent (UA) and 
> User Agent (UA) sends INVITE with Support header with value as 'timer' to 
> other end point.
>   And end point responds with 2xx response with Require header with value 
> 'timer'.
>    
>   What User Agent (UA) should do ??
>         a) send ACK, followed by BYE request 
>         b) Let application to decide
>         c) ignore it and establish call
>    
>         i) If refresher parameter in Session Header is set to uas
>                       a) Let application to decide
>                       b) send CANCEL request
>                       c) send ACK, followed by BYE request 
>                       d) ignore it and establish call
>    
>       ii) If refresher parameter is set to uac
>                     a) send ACK, followed by BYE request 
>                     b) ignore it and establish call
>                     c) Let application to decide
>   
As Harsha has already said, this is incorrect - a UA which will not make 
use of Session Timers should not put a "Supported: timer" header in the 
INVITE in the first place.

However, did you mean what would happen in the scenario where the UA 
sends in an INVITE with the "Supported: timer" but minus the 
Session-Expires header?
i.e. The UA does support the session timer mechanism but does not wish 
to initiate it's use itself?

Regards,
   Steve.

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

Reply via email to