[SIPForum-discussion] Time interval between requests

[mustafa aydin]

Hi Abhisek,
 
But here the originator does not want to terminate the dialog, it just wants to terminate the re-invite transaction.
 
Please also see;
 
RFC 6141


________________________________
From: Abhisek Acharya <abhisek.acharya at gmail.com>
To: mustafa aydin <mustafaydin82 at yahoo.com> 
Cc: "discussion at sipforum.org" <discussion at sipforum.org> 
Sent: Friday, September 7, 2012 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: [SIPForum-discussion] Time interval between requests


Another thing Mustafa.

Let us assume a media session is going on and you send a RE-INVITE to change the media characteristic.In that case if you cut the call manually from the sip phone then it should always generate a BYE not a CANCEL.

over to you all the folks in the mailing list.

regards
abhisek acharya
gslab,pune,india 



On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:00 PM, mustafa aydin <mustafaydin82 at yahoo.com> wrote:

Hi All,
>
>Is there any time frame mentioned in RFCs which defines time interval between REQUESTS? For example, can UAC send CANCEL of a RE-INVITE just 0.0004 sec later ?  I tested some SIP servers , but none of them could handle the CANCEL properly when it comes just in such a short interval, but I  need to refer to RFCs in order to prove this wrong behaviour to vendor.
>
>Thanks,
>Mustafa AYDIN
>_______________________________________________
>This is the SIP Forum discussion mailing list
>TO UNSUBSCRIBE, or edit your delivery options, please visit http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>Post to the list at discussion at sipforum.org
>
>



3.8.  Clarifications on Canceling Re-INVITEs
   Section 9.2 of RFC 3261 [RFC3261] specifies the behavior of a UAS
   responding to a CANCEL request.  Such a UAS responds to the INVITE
   request with a 487 (Request Terminated) at the SHOULD level.  Per the
   rules specified in Section 3.3, if the INVITE request was a re-INVITE
   and some of its requested changes had already been executed, the UAS
   would return a 2xx response instead.

Thanks,
Mustafa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20120907/a1f901a3/attachment-0002.html>