Christer Holmberg wrote:
11) I can't follow the second paragraph of section 9 at all. Can yourephrase it?Once I know what its trying to say, I'll propose alternate text.What it is supposed to say is that you cannot send a 199 if you are required (by the offer/answer rules) to include SDP.
Thinking about this further...This means that a proxy must track the o/a state of the dialog usage in order to know whether it can send a 199 or not. That could be a considerable burden. It requires maintaining partial dialog state rather than simply transaction state, and also requires more parsing of messages and potentially message bodies. (E.g. with multipart.)
This has me again questioning the cost/benefit tradeoff of the whole thing. Of course in this case the cost is to the proxy, and the benefit is to the UAC.
Paul _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip