答复: RE: RE: 答复: RE: RE: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: Closing the offer/answer rollback issue

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




If the new Re-INVITE is mandatory one, it is OK from the solution itself.

But I think it is heavy one :)

As there is light one, why not.




"Christer Holmberg" <christer.holmberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

2009-02-27 18:57

收件人
<gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx>
抄送
"Gonzalo Camarillo" <gonzalo.camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <sipping@xxxxxxxx>, <sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx>
主题
RE: RE: [Sipping] 答复: RE: RE: Re: ??: Re:  ??: Re:  ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re:  Closing the offer/answer rollback issue





If UE-B does not want to use video, he would have to send a new SDP offer, where video is removed. Mid-boxes etc would then remove the video.
 
If UE-B does not remove the video, he will be charged for it etc. There is nothing "illegal" about that.


From: gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:
Friday, February 27, 2009 12:30 PM
To:
Christer Holmberg
Cc:
Gonzalo Camarillo; sipping@xxxxxxxx; sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx
Subject:
答复: RE: [Sipping] 答复: RE: RE: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: Closing the offer/answer rollback issue







"Christer Holmberg" <christer.holmberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

2009-02-27 18:13


收件人
<gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx>
抄送
<sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx>, <sipping@xxxxxxxx>, "Gonzalo Camarillo" <gonzalo.camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
主题
RE: [Sipping] 答复: RE: RE: Re: ??: Re:  ??: Re:  ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re:  Closing the offer/answer rollback issue







So, what is the difference if the video is rejected using a re-INVITE error response, or a new SDP offer?


The difference is that:

"Late commitment", if user reject it, any mid-box knows the modification should be discarded. And the two sides have no way to use it anymore.
And everything is clear.

"If in use, let it alone", if user reject it, any mid-box let the modification alone. And the two sides can use it (illegal).
And you may say the mid-box can close the gate. Then which case should be close? I think the classfication would be the same as (which case should)rollback.

If users use other codecs than have been negotiated in the SDP I think is out of the scope of this discussion.




From: sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent:
Friday, February 27, 2009 12:07 PM
To:
Christer Holmberg
Cc:
sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx; sipping@xxxxxxxx; Gonzalo Camarillo
Subject:
[Sipping] 答复: RE: RE: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: Closing the offer/answer rollback issue



I just mean that B can pretend to reject the adding vedio modification request. But A and B use vedio after the rejecting 4xx.


That is yhe illegal situation.




"Christer Holmberg" <christer.holmberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

2009-02-27 18:02


收件人
<gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx>
抄送
"Gonzalo Camarillo" <gonzalo.camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <sipping@xxxxxxxx>, <sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx>, <wang.libo@xxxxxxxxxx>
主题
RE: RE: Re: ??: Re: [Sipping] ??: Re:  ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re:  Closing the offer/answer rollback issue










Hi,


>
If B do not do so, then A and B can use it illegal. That's what I said times :)  

I am not sure I understand...


If B doesn't want to use video, he should remove it (no matter how it is done).


If he doesn't remove it, it will be used, charged for etc. I don't know what is "illegal" by that.


Regards,


Christer




"Christer Holmberg" <christer.holmberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

2009-02-27 17:31


收件人
<wang.libo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Gonzalo Camarillo" <gonzalo.camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
抄送
<gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx>, <sipping@xxxxxxxx>, <sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx>
主题
RE: Re: ??: Re: [Sipping] ??: Re:  ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re:  Closing the offer/answer rollback issue











Hi,


If preconditions are met for the video stream, but UE-B then decideds that he doesn't want to video, an alternative to "late commitment" is for UE-B to send a new re-INVITE/offer to UE-A and remove the video.


Regards,


Christer




From:
wang.libo@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wang.libo@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:
Friday, February 27, 2009 11:25 AM
To:
Gonzalo Camarillo
Cc:
Christer Holmberg; gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx; sipping@xxxxxxxx; sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx
Subject:
答复: Re: ??: Re: [Sipping] ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: Closing the offer/answer rollback issue



Hi Gonzalo Camarillo,


If UE-A wants to communicate with UE-B by video, but UE-B only want to communicate by audio.

and if they uses the new SDP, when pre-conditions met, UE-B will send his/her videos regardless

of UE-B's willing.

And if UE-B never send his video although the pre-conditions are met, then UE-A will be puzzled why
he/she is charged for vedio while receiving NO vedio from UE-B.


I think this is a operational problem that we have to solve too.


regards,

Eric

Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

2009-02-27 17:10


收件人
wang.libo@xxxxxxxxxx
抄送
christer.holmberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx, gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx, sipping@xxxxxxxx, sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx
主题
Re: ??: Re: [Sipping] ??: Re:  ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re: ??: Re:  Closing the offer/answer rollback issue













Hi,

> Also If pre-conditions are met,and re-INVITE fails, UEs could use the
> new SDP.
> This solution will give someone a way to escape charging.  
> For example, if UEs use audio at the first time,
> then one of them raise a re-INVITE with a SDP carrying both audio and
> video,
> after the preconditions are met, then the other rejects the re-INVITE,
> but they can communicate with both audio and video after all.

No, if they negotiate video and the preconditions are met, they will be
charged for video, regardless of what happens with the re-INVITE.

Cheers,

Gonzalo



--------------------------------------------------------
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.



--------------------------------------------------------
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.



--------------------------------------------------------
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.



--------------------------------------------------------
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.


--------------------------------------------------------
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 sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip
Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Announce]     [IETF Discussion]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Big List of Linux Books]

  Powered by Linux