Yep, as it's been covered in the diagram, they seem to have missed out the final response from TU in the Trying state in the write-up. In the Trying state, a final response from TU must take it to state 'Completed'.
- Ben. --- On Sun, 7/13/08, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [Sip-implementors] Bug in "17.2.2 Non-INVITE Server Transaction" ? > To: [email protected] > Date: Sunday, July 13, 2008, 5:34 PM > Hi, "17.2.2 Non-INVITE Server Transaction" > doesn't consider the case in which > the transaction state is "Trying" and the > transaction receives from the TU a > final response, this is: > - state = "Trying" > - response from TU = final response > > The only case considered is: > "If the TU passes a final response (status > codes 200-699) to the server while in the > "Proceeding" state, the > transaction MUST enter the "Completed" > state..." > > This doesn't make sense since it's totally possible > that TU sends a final > response without sending before a provisional response. > It's also considered > in the diagram of page 139. > > Is it a bug? Opinions? > > -- > Iñaki Baz Castillo > > _______________________________________________ > 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
