Hi, 

>>All we need is draft-subscribe-header-for-invite... :)
> 
>THis of course is predicated on the assumption that the same 
>two parties are the right ones to be involved in the 
>subscription and the invite. 
>This works out ok for DTMF. It remains to be seen where else 
>it is valid.
> 
>It might seem that it would be valid for the dialog event 
>package. But it might not be if the goal is to get 
>consolidated event state for all UASs of the same AOR. Its 
>far from clear that the subscriber would know. 
>So there probably at least needs to be some way to accept the 
>INVITE but reject the bundled subscription. And in that case 
>the caller needs to move to "plan B".
> 
>The "bundled subscriptions" need to be negotiated in both directions. 
>That means something like:
> 
>INVITE must contain:
>- these are the events I am willing to send
>- these are the events I desire to receive
> 
>response must contain:
>- these are the events I will send (subset from invite)
> - these are the events you should send (subset from invite)

Maybe we could re-use the SDP direction attributes (sendrecv, sendonly,
recvonly) for this?

Regards,

Christer


_______________________________________________
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