Be generous in what you expect, but send a 481. ;-)
thanks,
-rohan
On Nov 12, 2008, at 2:31 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
We can argue about whether a UA should send a 481 in this case.
What we can't do is change what any given deployed UA actually does
in this case.
The difference between "should" and "does" is critical when trying
to leverage deployed behavior.
/a
On 11/9/08 4:02 PM, Rohan Mahy wrote:
Hi Jiri,
I am just saying that you if you send a 481 in this case, the
semantics are clear and consistent with some other event package
that uses call-id attributes. If you receive a 481 in this case
you can act accordingly. You could also get back a NOTIFY with a
body with full state with no dialogs, but this is less useful.
thanks,
-rohan
On Nov 9, 2008, at 1:45 PM, Jiri Kuthan wrote:
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
_______________________________________________
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
