Let's talk the point:
Does 200OK of Re-INVITE is the "Late commitment" of everything during it?
I do not think so.
I insist that 200OK of Re-INVITE is the "Late commitment" of only the modification triggered by Re-INVITE, not everything during it.
The modification including "Target refresh" and Session.
Precondition notification is part of the modification triggered by Re-INVITE, so it obeys commitment/rollback of the original one.
And eveything is clear, I think there is no interoperability issue.
| Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
2009-03-04 16:19 |
|
Hi,
well, if after reading the disadvantages of doing so you still want to
use it, then you probably like to have interoperability problems :o)
Cheers,
Gonzalo
Christer Holmberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't think the draft forbids you from using 4xx to re-INVITE, but it explains the disadvantage of doing so if you have committed changes.
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: 4. maaliskuuta 2009 10:08
> To: Gonzalo Camarillo
> Cc: sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx; sipping
> Subject: [Sipping] 答复: Re: 答复: Re: 答复: Rollback issue: a proposal
>
>
>
> I think I explained why I can use 4xx of Re-INVITE, without making anything ambiguously.
>
> The point is that do you agree that later UPDATE/200OK commit the target refresh.
>
>
>
>
> Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> 2009-03-04 15:46
>
>
> 收件人
> gao.yang2@xxxxxxxxxx
> 抄送
> sipping-bounces@xxxxxxxx, sipping <sipping@xxxxxxxx>
> 主题
> Re: [Sipping] 答复: Re: 答复: Rollback issue: a proposal
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> > [Gao] I just wanted to say if UPDATE/200OK committed the target refresh,
> > it should be free for 4xx of Re-INVITE.
>
> I insist. You should re-read the draft. It explains why you should not
> use 4xx response to cancel changes. The advantage of the approach in the
> draft is that it does not require normative changes to already
> implemented specs. It is more a BCP kind of spec. That is why its
> backwards compatibility properties are good.
>
> 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.
_______________________________________________ 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
