The assumption is that the transfer target rejects the initial early
dialog on receiving the REFER. The 180 and 487 would be sent in the
NOTIFY associated with the REFER.

I'm not trying to pick on any vendors here but take a look at what is
called "attended transfer with early completion" on this link:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps1839/products_feature_
guide09186a0080110c01.html

Thanks,
James

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 12:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sip] RFC3891 (Replaces header) discrepancies

   From: "Jackson, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

   Consider an attended transfer in which call1 is established between a
   transferee and a transferor. The transferor creates a new call2
towards
   transfer target. While this call is still alerting (early dialog), it
   sends a REFER on call1 with a Replaces header that references call2.
In
   this case, the Replaces header attempts to replace an early dialog
which
   was "terminated" by the target.

That is not allowed by RFC 3891.  But suppose it was allowed.  Further
suppose that the transfer target rings for another 90 seconds (sending
an additional 180) and then the proxy that manages the transfer target
cancels the call, causing the transfer target to send a 487.  Who
receives the 180 and 487?

Dale


_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip


_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip

Reply via email to