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