El Wednesday 20 August 2008 17:08:08 Paul Kyzivat escribió: > The scoping of Allow is not at all well defined. > So it might be that you *did* support UPDATE when you sent an Allow > mentioning it, but stopped supporting it later. But its silly to provoke > this problem by claiming you allow something when you don't.
But there is no solution for that, is it? A B2BUA could first try to generate a second leg against a UAS supporting UPDATE but later against other UAS not supporting it, so "Allow" received by the UAC would change "dynamically". Well, if "Allow" wouldn't exist this problem wouldn't exist. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
