Sdp should not be present in the 200(INVITE),
RFC3261 sec 13.2.1 Creating the Initial INVITE
o Once the UAS has sent or received an answer to the initial
offer, it MUST NOT generate subsequent offers in any responses
to the initial INVITE. This means that a UAS based on this
specification alone can never generate subsequent offers until
completion of the initial transaction.
Fyi
-Rockson
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Subbu Rajendran
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 3:31 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Sip-implementors] Query related to SDP in 200 OK after UPDATE
Hi All,
Following is example call flow from RFC 3311 (SIP UPDATE Method). Is SDP
a must in the 200 OK for INVITE in this case? If it is required, then
200 OK should contain 'answer 3'. Is this a legal behavior as answer in
200 OK for INVITE ('answer 3') is not based on the offer in the INVITE
('offer 1').
Could anyone please explain or point me to the RFC that explains this
case?
Caller Callee
(1) INVITE with offer 1
|---------------------------->|
(2) 180 with answer 1
|<----------------------------|
(3) PRACK
|---------------------------->|
(4) 200 PRACK
|<----------------------------|
(5) UPDATE with offer 2
|---------------------------->|
(6) 200 UPDATE with answer 2
|<----------------------------|
(7) UPDATE with offer 3
|<----------------------------|
(8) 200 UPDATE with answer 3
|---------------------------->|
(9) 200 INVITE (SDP ?)
|<----------------------------|
(10) ACK
|---------------------------->|
Thanks & Regards,
Subbu
_______________________________________________
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
