I am a little bit confused here,

Two guys raised the same question before, unfortunately no any replies.

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg03148.html

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg03416.html

FYI

Regards,
-Rockson
 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Elison Niven
Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 2:20 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] a=sendrecv or a=recvonly in SDP answer

Hi,

Regarding my previous post then, isn't this example from RFC4317 section
3.2 clearly violating RFC3264 section 6.1?

    [Second-Offer]

      v=0
      o=bob 2808844564 2808844565 IN IP4 host.biloxi.example.com
      s=
      c=IN IP4 host.biloxi.example.com
      t=0 0
      m=audio 49172 RTP/AVP 97
      a=rtpmap:97 iLBC/8000
      a=sendonly
      m=audio 49174 RTP/AVP 98
      a=rtpmap:98 telephone-event/8000
      a=recvonly

    [Second-Answer]

      v=0
      o=alice 2890844526 2890844527 IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
      s=
      c=IN IP4 host.atlanta.example.com
      t=0 0
      m=audio 49170 RTP/AVP 0 97
      a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
      a=rtpmap:97 iLBC/8000
      m=audio 49172 RTP/AVP 98
      a=rtpmap:98 telephone-event/8000
      a=sendonly


> See that in the second offer, Bob sends an a=sendonly line to put 
> Alice on
hold, but Alice does not send it. 
> Shouldn't Alice put an a=recvonly line in the answer to indicate the
acceptance of the mode? Or is she still
> using a=sendrecv?

Regards,
Elison

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to