> > Furthermore, it would appear that it is necessary to know in advance that
> > you are going to use sub-sessions. The RFC says that the absence of the
> > Accounting-Sub-Session-Id AVP implies that no sub-sessions are in use. This
> > means that it is not possible to start a session without the presence of
> > the sub-session AVP and subsequently start using sub-sessions as it is not
> > possible to send INTERIM_RECORDs on the original session without implying
> > that no sub-sessions are in use.
>
> Hmm... perhaps the language is a bit unclear. My interpretation
> of the intent of the text is that if you send a record without
> the sub session AVP then that record does not belong to a sub
> session (no subsessions are in use for THIS record), but
> that other sub sessions could still be in progress. But if
> you send the STOP_RECORD for the top-level session then it
> also implicitly closes all subsessions.
>
> What do others think?
This is my interpretation as well.
John
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.