This would certainly be valid as the initial notify after a new
subscription. It would also be perfectly valid if there was a *change*
that led to this state. (The numbers were bigger before, and the
messages were deleted.)
Nor, afaik, is it *wrong* for a notifier to send a redundant
notification, though it might not be preferred behavior.
I think you have no complaint here.
Thanks,
Paul
Jagan Mohan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> SIP phone receives the following in the NOTIFY message.
>
> NOTIFY sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SIP/2.0
> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.225.196:2942;branch=
> z9hG4bK10316335372635889177391012394138
> ---
> Messages-Waiting: yes
> Message-Account: sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Voice-Message: 0/0 (0/0)
> Fax-Message: 0/0 (0/0)
>
> I would like to know whether this message is valid since "Message-Waiting"
> is set to yes but there are zero messages.
>
> If the message is invalid, what should be the response from SIP phone?
>
> SIP phone has subscribed for MWI indication.
>
> Thanks,
> Jagan
> _______________________________________________
> 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
