Right, but as I said this new Info-package draft does not make the problem any worse for this scenario than it already was. And in fact it can make it better even for this scenario. That's all we need to do. I don't think there's a solution to solve this scenario for legacy or new Info usage, without having the B2BUA understand the draft, and once it does that we're ok anyway.
-hadriel > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 9:33 AM > > Hadriel Kaplan wrote: > > - If the B2BUA moved the call discretely but did NOT know about this new > Info draft thingy, then it could *indeed* be a problem if it blindly > passed on the Nortel recv-info but not the later Cisco one. And it > wouldn't pass on the Cisco's recv-info only because it is hiding the > dialog move from Snom. > > This is normal 3pcc transfer trouble, just like the problems of moving > the media in such a case if the b2bua doesn't terminate media. That is > why I called out this case earlier. > > Its a little tricky when it doesn't know about the new draft. If it is > switching the media then it will be doing a reinvite/update with the new > endpoint anyway, and so will be getting a new recv-info. As long as it > passes that transparently things should work out. Its more of a problem > if it relaying the media, so that it doesn't intend to do a new o/a > exchange, then its more problematic. > > It *could* work, but there are a lot of "if"s. > > The bottom line is that the b2buas will have to learn how to make this > work. They will just need to get with the program and be ready before > this stuff is deployed in endpoints. _______________________________________________ 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
