Re: INVITE dialogs
Paul Kyzivat <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sip |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
[email protected] wrote: > From: Paul Kyzivat <[email protected]> > > I think the alarm bells go off for the UAC when it receives the 200 for > the ini-invite. It really shouldn't want to send the ACK yet, because as > far as it is concerned, it has an unanswered offer outstanding. > > I don't think this is a workable solution -- it means that the logic > for handing the INVITE transaction (specifically, sending the ACK) has > to pay attention to the completion status of other transactions. > That's not a good thing to do. Well, since this is the *200* response to the INVITE, the ACK is s separate transaction generated by the UAC Core. There is no need to delay the ACK if the response is an error response, which is the case when the ACK is part of the same transaction. Thanks, Paul _______________________________________________ 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