[SIPForum-discussion] query.

[Ravi Siebel]

Hi Nitin,
 
Thanks for your response. 
 
1) How do we handle the scenario where Put-On-Hold and blind call transfer are crossing each other at a time.
 
Regards
Ravi 

--- On Fri, 7/4/08, Nittin Dutt <Nittin.Dutt at csr.com> wrote:

From: Nittin Dutt <Nittin.Dutt at csr.com>
Subject: RE: [SIPForum-discussion] query.
To: ravi_siebel at yahoo.com, discussion at sipforum.org
Date: Friday, July 4, 2008, 4:47 PM









A can blind transfer B in between a hold. A sends a REFER to B, its up to the B to present the user the choice to continue with transfer or just carry on with transfer anyway (can show on phone screen that call has been transferred). Existing hold doesn’t make any difference at this stage; new transferred session would negotiate media from scratch now.
 

B can also transfer A. Soon after getting 202 response for REFER, B would BYE to A and an existing hold is irrelevant now. Again A would start afresh media negotiation with the party it’s just been transferred to.
 
-Nittin Dutt
(nutsnduts)
 





From: discussion-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:discussion-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of Ravi Siebel
Sent: 04 July 2008 08:16
To: discussion at sipforum.org
Subject: [SIPForum-discussion] query.
 




Hi All, 
 
Suppose their is a P2P SIP call established between user agent A & B. Now A puts B on hold. 
 
Here I do have ceratin queries to get clarify with you. 
 
Query 1. Consider at this present situation , Can A party do the blind Call Transfer to some valid transfer target.
If yes, how does if affected on hold done by A towards B. '
If No then what is the reason ? 
 
Query 2. Consider at this present situation, Can B party do the blind Call Transfer to some valid transfer target.
If yes, how does if affected on hold done by A towards B. what happened to rtp on side A.
If No, then what is the reason ? 
 
Regards,
Ravi



To report this email as spam click here.


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20080708/c4961aa2/attachment-0002.html>