> In summary,
> an (re)INVITE sometimes need an judgement by a human user,
> while an UPDATE need NOT it, that response automatecally.
> 
> By the way,
> which RFC that is written in and where is written?

The following is snippet from rfc3311 section 5.1:

"Although UPDATE can be used on confirmed dialogs, it is RECOMMENDED that a 
re-INVITE be used instead.  This is because an UPDATE needs to be answered 
immediately, ruling out the possibility of user approval.  Such approval will 
frequently be needed, and is possible with a re-INVITE."


The following is snippet from rfc3311 section 5.2:

"However, unlike a re-INVITE, the UPDATE MUST be responded to promptly, and 
therefore the user cannot generally be prompted to approve the session changes. 
 If the UAS cannot change the session parameters without prompting the user, it 
SHOULD reject the request with a 504 response."


_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to