Hi, Yes, a CANCEL is valid only for an INVITE method.
Hence when a CANCEL arrives with a CSeq number that does not match INVITE can it not be considered that a mis-behaving entity is attempting to CANCEL a non-INVITE transaction? Kindly clarify. Thank You. Regards, Suganya On 6/17/08, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > El Tuesday 17 June 2008 05:04:22 Suganya D escribió: >> Hi All, >> >> Thank you for your responses. >> >> Since usage of 481 as per RFC 3261 seems to have its cons, is it >> correct to interpret that the CANCEL with incorrect CSeq number is a >> request that attempts to cancel a non-INVITE transaction? In case such >> an interpretation is correct, can a 405 response be sent for the >> CANCEL? > > I don't think so. CANCEL is just valid for INVITE and not for other methods. > The only scenario in which a CANCEL with incorrect CSeq can arrive to the > UAS > is when the CANCEL (CSeq = 1234) arrived to the UAS **before** the INVITE > (CSeq = 1234). > > Regards. > > -- > Iñaki Baz Castillo > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > 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
