Re: [sipcore] Comments on draft-roach-sipcore-rfc3265bis-00

	3265 specifies that a reason param of "deactivated" on a NOTIFY  
terminated should cause the UAC to immediately re-establish the  
subscription.  (See Sec 3.2.4, or 4.1.3 in bis-00) Whether this is  
actually implemented... *shrug*

Best regards,
Byron Campen

> Do we have a way of terminating a subscription that subscribers are  
> likely to interpret as "sorry but I'd like you to try again"?
>
> The closest I can think of would be send a REFER.
>
> 	Thanks,
> 	Paul
>
> Dale Worley wrote:
>> On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 16:02 -0400, Dale Worley wrote:
>>>> But the no-reduce rule has its own trouble. In particular my  
>>>> usual source of exceptions to everything: 3pcc. The subscriber  
>>>> may think he is continuing a single subscription. But a middle  
>>>> box may be moving a subscription from one UAS to another. The new  
>>>> target may not be willing to support such a long subscription,  
>>>> and so may have need to reduce it.
>>> That's an annoyingly realistic problem.
>> In this situation, can we demand that the middle box terminate the
>> subscription (rather than shorten it), with the expectation that the
>> subscriber will create a new subscription?  (In terms of message
>> traffic, there is little additional load.)
>> Dale
> _______________________________________________
> sipcore mailing list
> sipcore@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore

Re: [sipcore] Comments on draft-roach-sipcore-rfc3265bis-00

Attachment: smime.p7s