Hi Eric, Eric wang <eric.wangxr@xxxxxxxxx> Thu, 15 Apr 2010 13:29:41 +0800 >Hi Paul, > >I have been in the world for many years =_=!!!! >We shouldn't make complicated rules because the system has >already been complicated. > >In my opinion, the offer/answer model works well if responses >are reliable. >If we allow several reliable 18x with SDP, what happen if 18x >is after UPDATEs.There must be some rules saying "NO". >I prefer several reliable 18xs with SDP appear only in fork. I'm confused. Nobody says that several reliable 18x may include a SDP even if it is the same as the answer. Just you said "different SDPs(compare with the answer) can exist in non-reliable response and final 2xx response". Regards, Shinji >BR >Eric > >Paul Kyzivat wrote >> >> Eric wang wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > I believe that SDP in non-reliable response is useful. eg, if the >> > UAS wants to send a tone to UAC while the UAC doesn't support 100rel, >> > the UAS can use a non-reliable response with the tone SDP. >> > So I believe different SDPs(compare with the answer) can exist in >> > non-reliable response and final 2xx response. >> >> IMO this makes no sense. For one thing, the UAC is instructed to accept >> the first and ignore the rest, so sending differing values will have no >> utility. For another, this only affects where the UAS will receive media >> - it can have no effect on where the UAC receives media. Generally the >> UAC isn't transmitting until the call is established, so what is the point. >> >> > But, when I saw the chart below, the only words in my mind is ,"OMG, >> > the SIP is never SI(m)P(le) again!" >> >> Where have you been? SIP hasn't been simple since early in the century. >> >> Thanks, >> Paul _______________________________________________ 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
