From: "Brett Tate" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> RFC 3261 section 13.2.2.4 discusses the impacts of INVITE 2xx when a dialog known because prior 1xx.
Paragraph 3 appears to conflict with paragraph 2 concerning updating the route set. Paragraph 2 indicates that the route set must be recomputed per 12.2.1.2 (which updates the remote-target without discussing record-route). Paragraph 3 appears to indicate that the route set should be impacted by 2xx record-route for backwards compatibility reasons. What should be the impacts of received INVITE 2xx's record-route upon existing dialog switching to confirmed? Clearly, the Record-Routes in the 1xx and the 2xx have to be the same, because they are derived from the Record-Routes seen in the INVITE as the UAS received it. Given that restriction, when RFC 3261 says that a 2xx "updates the route set", the route set proper (that is, excluding the remote target (contact)) specified by the 2xx is the same as the one specified by the 1xx, and so the "update" causes no change. Dale _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
