答复: RE: RE: 答复: RE: RE: no n-200 response to PRACK

"Christer Holmberg" <[email protected]> 写于 2009-04-09 
16:03:06:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
>    >>At least we decided during an IETF meeting that it should be 
allowed
>    >>to reject a PRACK SDP offer using a 4xx response. I think we then 
>    >>later on the list realized that a PRACK can be rejected for other 
>    >>reasons also.
>    > 
>    >[Gao] If UAC(of PRACK) is introspective enough(deducing from the
> *MUST* 2xx of UAS), I think there would be very infrequence of 4xx. 
> 
> I think 4xx already now is quite infrequent. But we still need to 
> know how to deal with it when it happens.
> 

[Gao] You can see my *answer* to Brett's mail.

> 
>    >I still think it is not obligatory modification, but a choice. 
> 
> What is?
> 
> 
>    >And if someone find a case, in which we MUST using PRACK to do 
> something rejectable, then it is a obligatory modification of RFC3262. 
> 
> I think at least Paul and Brett has indicated that there are cases 
> when it is useful to be able to reject the PRACK.

[Gao] I am sure we can find many usages *can* be used in PRACK and there 
usages really rejectable.
But as we do not MUST do it as that, so we can leave it alone.

But as I said in previous mail, if we want to enrich *SubSet1(usages 
suitable in PRACK)*, then the work is needful.

> 
> Personally I think it's bad protocol design to say that one *MUST* 
> send a 200 response - no matter what.
> 

[Gao] IMO, it is not elegant one, but no that bad :)
Perhaps because of reductionism. And the author really bypass the topic 
current talked.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> 
> 



--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
Use [email protected] for new developments of core SIP