Hi Adam,

Adam Roach wrote:
> Ah -- "statelessly" means something very different to you than it does
> to me. I think you need to explicitly call out that you're proposing a
> modification to the basic INVITE transaction model defined in RFC 3261
> for this new response.
>
> This, combined with prohibiting provisional responses, would seem to
> have the desired effect.

I don't think there is any proposed modification.  The response should
be sent according to the rules of RFC 3261 section 8.2.7.  Amongst other
things, this specifically prohibits provisional responses.

I think the draft should explicitly mention this section.

Regards,

Michael
_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to