Christer Holmberg wrote:
One option, as proposed by Paul, is to say that a UAC shall be able to RECEIVE
reliable 199 responses.
Based on my comments above, I am reconsidering the advisability of that.
Well, I guess it wouldn't affect the complexness in the UAC, since it will have
to be able to handle reliable provisional responses anyway (if it indicates
support of it, that is).
Yes, I think it does increase the complexity in the implementation of
199 handling.
You are right that the PRACK itself would be handled by the standard
machinery for reliable provisionals. But then tearing down the dialog,
which is what the 199 is supposed to trigger, can't be done upon receipt
of a reliable 199. Rather it must wait until the after the PRACK is at
least send, and perhaps until the 200 for the prack is received. And
this is different than for the unreliable 199. This isn't rocket
science, but it is more complexity. And of course it requires something
that sends reliable 199s in order to test the UAC.
Paul
And, if the sender of the 199 is a B2BUA, I guess it COULD send it reliably.
But, I have no strong feelings regarding this.
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.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
