Re: SIP INFO

Brett Tate <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sip
Message-ID <9B2A061A1137254BBE4F4B2CD843646A10BFF48D85@mbx02.citservers.local>
Because of race/glare conditions, I prefer INFO 489 not MUST or SHOULD trigger the release of the call.  Concerning calls, I see little difference between impacts of 489 and 405/501/420.  Thus I prefer option 2.

Option 2 appears reasonably consistent with notes 3 and 12 within RFC 5057 section 5.1.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Burger [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 9:29 AM
> To: Brett Tate
> Cc: SIP IETF
> Subject: Re: [Sip] SIP INFO
> 
> On Mar 23, 2009, at 6:19 AM, Brett Tate wrote:
> > What was the outcome of INFO 489 response MUST trigger release of
> > call discussion?
> 
> Whoops - that was slide 2...
> 
> *Get a 489, can all still be fine?
> 	*Option 1: Tear down dialog
> 		Something is hopelessly broken, give up
> 
> 	*Option 2: ignore it
> 		-We say INFO does not change dialog state,
>                    and a 489 tearing down dialog changes state
> 		-But, handling 489 differently for INFO makes INFO "special"
> 		-But what if I said "package X is OK" in an INVITE, but there
> is
>                    glare between you sending an INFO from package X
> and my
>                   dropping X in my ACK?
> 
> 
> Thoughts?
_______________________________________________
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
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.