El Thursday 21 August 2008 09:24:42 Rockson Li (zhengyli) escribió:
> However, I wonder if it's really true.
>
> since
>
> sec 9.1 Client Behavior
>
> A CANCEL request SHOULD NOT be sent to cancel a request other than
> INVITE.
>
>
> so why proxy MUST cancel forked non-INVITE req here?
Note that 16.7 section 10 also says:
The requirement to CANCEL pending client transactions upon
forwarding a final response does not guarantee that an endpoint
will not receive multiple 200 (OK) responses to an INVITE
I think it just means the INVITE transaction.
Anyway, I think that a proxy should not generate CANCEL for non INVITE pending
requests, and instead just wait for the rest of final responses (in case of
forking) and absorb them. Unfortnuatelly this behaviour breaks the
transaction client layer in a proxy, doesn't it?
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
