Hi Rohan,
is this our wishful thinking (I would like it too for it simplifies few
things) only, or is there a normative reference (which I can't find).
The way I read the related stuff is I get a 200 for the SUB back, and
an "empty" NOTIFY.
-jiri
Rohan Mahy wrote:
Hi,
The UA should respond with a 481. In the case of an out of dialog
request the *meaning* of the response in this context is easy to
understand. A receiving UA realizes that it referred to some dialog that
does not exist. There are far too few response codes for us to create a
new one in this situation, and it is unlikely that an automaton will be
able to recover from this error if it has a different code.
thanks,
-rohan
On Oct 25, 2008, at 10:26 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
This SUBSCRIBE arrives to Alice's UA which is not aware of that
dialog. Which
response should it reply? The flow suggests "481 Call/Transaction doesn't
exist", but... is it correct?
AFAIK, a 481 should be replied when an *in-dialog* request arrives to
an UAS
which is not aware of that dialog. But in the above case we have an
*initial*
request and the 481 refers to the specific dialog in the "Event" header.
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
