RE: [Sip] Open Issue #58: Rejected mid-call SDP in 2xx

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brett Tate [mailto:brett@broadsoft.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 4:10 PM
> To: 'Jonathan Rosenberg'
> Cc: sip@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Sip] Open Issue #58: Rejected mid-call SDP in 2xx
> 
> 
> Sounds fine with me.  However I guess that the 
> "MUST" will have implications for devices that 
> can't or don't distinguish between INVITE and 
> re-INVITE after having underwent a restart.

I had forgotten about this case. Good observation.

> I guess that these UA's would have to persist 
> parts of the SDP if they wish to allow a 
> re-INVITE without SDP to re-establish a call
> (which I don't recommend).

I agree that thats ugly.

I suppose that we could say that its a MUST to use the existing SDP if you
know it. A UA that sends a re-INVITE w/o SDP MUST be prepared for SDP that
may be different for the reason you describe. Hopefully its something
acceptable. If its not, BYE the call. I don't think we can reasonably do
better. We're already talking about the case where the UA has failed and
recovered.

Sound OK?

-Jonathan R.

---
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                72 Eagle Rock Ave.
Chief Scientist                             First Floor
dynamicsoft                                 East Hanover, NJ 07936
jdrosen@dynamicsoft.com                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip