> The reason why we have this whole discussion is because the 
> current specifications are unclear.

As mentioned before, I think the following RFC 3261 quote is clear although 
some disagree.

RFC 3261 section 14.1: "If a UA receives a non-2xx final response to a 
re-INVITE, the session parameters MUST remain unchanged, as if no re-INVITE had 
been issued."


> Regarding your second bullet, I don't even think that one 
> should send "nested" UPDATEs, if they don't have anything to 
> do with the re-INVITE. I think that is bad application design. 
> Non-related changes should be done outside the re-INVITE transaction.
 
Sending UPDATE per RFC 4028 to refresh or audit the dialog is one of the times 
UPDATE may be tried while a re-INVITE is occurring.

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implement...@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipp...@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip

Reply via email to