Thanks Brett. I think section 5.1 of 3311 made is clear anyways. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Brett Tate [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 4:12 PM
To: Manpreet Singh
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] Offer/Answer question

No.  

Incase you have not seen it, the following draft is useful in clarifying
offer/answer from rfc3261, rfc3262, rfc3264, and rfc3311:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sipping-sip-offeranswer-07


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Manpreet Singh
> Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 12:29 AM
> To: Paul Kyzivat
> Cc: Bob Penfield; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/Answer question
> 
> Is this flow legal from offer answer perspective? ( just want to make 
> sure if UPDATE can carry an answer to the invite transaction )
> 
> --------->Invite with Offer
> <---------180 Ringing ( no SDP )
> <----------UPDATE with answer?
> ----------->200OK to update
> <-----------200Ok for Invite ( another possible offer ? )
> ------------>ACK ( answer to offer in 200OK )
> 
> Thanks



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

Reply via email to