> The reason why we have this whole discussion is because the > current specifications are unclear. As mentioned before, I think the following RFC 3261 quote is clear although some disagree. RFC 3261 section 14.1: "If a UA receives a non-2xx final response to a re-INVITE, the session parameters MUST remain unchanged, as if no re-INVITE had been issued." > Regarding your second bullet, I don't even think that one > should send "nested" UPDATEs, if they don't have anything to > do with the re-INVITE. I think that is bad application design. > Non-related changes should be done outside the re-INVITE transaction. Sending UPDATE per RFC 4028 to refresh or audit the dialog is one of the times UPDATE may be tried while a re-INVITE is occurring. _______________________________________________ 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
