El Thursday 14 August 2008 05:44:42 Rockson Li (zhengyli) escribió: > > 2) - UAS receives a CANCEL for an INVITE transaction for which UAS has > > already sent a final response. In this case RFC3261 says: > > > > "the CANCEL > > request has no effect on the processing of the original request, no > > effect on any session state, and no effect on the responses generated > > for the original request." > > > > - But should UAS reply a 4XX?
> [RL] since INVITE server transaction would be terminated on delivery of > 2xx, so I think CANCEL cannot match any to-be-cancelled transaction, so 481 > would be sent. But what about if the final response was [3456]XX ? > However, draft-sparks-sip-invfix intends change INVITE > trasanction , so I think 200(CANCEL) will be sent after this draft is > accepted to update RFC3261. Thanks, I must re-read it. > 3) UAS receives a CANCEL that matches an active NON-INVITE transaction. RFC > says: > > "A CANCEL request has no impact on the processing of > transactions with any other method defined in this specification > (INVITE)". > > - Which response should UAS sent? a 481? a 400? > [RL] I think 200(CANCEL) will be sent since rfc says > > "Regardless of the method of the original request, as long as the > CANCEL matched an existing transaction, the UAS answers the CANCEL > request itself with a 200 (OK) response. " > > 200 only means CANCEL is reached at UAS, it does not mean anything previous > transaction would be cancelled. We can send 200 for acknowledge CANCEL, but > continue processing non-INVITE req without any impact. Ok. Thanks a lot. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
