comments inline... On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:56 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2012/4/10 Shanbhag, Somesh (NSN - IN/Bangalore) <[email protected]>: > > 1) IN-DIALOG-1 = INVITE, IN-DIALOG-2 = BYE > > (1) Yes, Definitely BYE has higher precedence and should be honored. > > Makes sense. > > > > 2) IN-DIALOG-1 = INVITE, IN-DIALOG-2 = INVITE > > (2) 491 Request Pending should be sent. > > Why? RFC 3261 section 14.2 states that 491 is sent by a UAS that has > received an in-dialog request while a previous in-dialog request sent > *by him* has got no final response yet. It's not the same scenario. > [ABN] Generally 491 is meant for INVITE cross-over scenario, where INVITE requests are initiated by UAs in either directions. But for the scenario you have mentioned earlier, 491 is most suitable reply for the 2nd INVITE request. > > > 3) IN-DIALOG-1 = INVITE, IN-DIALOG-2 = OPTIONS > > (3) OPTIONS, it depends. UAS can reply with its capabilities right away. > > > > > -- > Iñaki Baz Castillo > <[email protected]> > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > -- Thanks, Nataraju A.B. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
