[SIPForum-techwg] Draft Version 5 - remaining discussion points

[Rohan Mahy]

> IP PBX / SP Interop WG team members,
>
> Following is a list of final discussion points derived from the "master
> list" of 2/27 - 3/2 comments, along with my comments on each.
>
> I look forward to hearing your thoughts and getting this wrapped up!
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Chris
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Rohan Mahy wrote:
> Section 14.1 2nd para
> Do we want to add that they MUST also send a:inactive/sendonly/recvonly?
>
> [Chris Sibley]
> I'm not sure I understand why? Paragraph two states that an endpoint
> should be prepared to receive an SDP offer containing all zeros in the
> connection field, which would presumably be coming from an older SIP
> (i.e. RFC 2543-compliant) endpoint. In that case the endpoint making the
> offer wouldn't be capable of adding a directionality indicator to the
> SDP, would it?

The motivation is that it allows endpoints to eventually deprecate usage
of 0.0.0.0.  Note that this is just a restatement of the (often
overlooked) MUSTs in the first paragraph of Section 5.1 of RFC 3264.


> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Rohan Mahy wrote:
> Nit (15.1 last para): Cut-through might be done on detection of early
> media at the RTP port rather than on receipt of SDP in a provisional
> response, as previously discussed in depth on the SIPPING mailing list.
>
>
> [Chris Sibley]
> This sounds like a reasonable thing to do, but is there an RFC or other
> "spec" we can legitimately reference?

Last paragraph of Section 5.1 of RFC 3264:
Once the offerer has sent the offer, it MUST be prepared to receive media
for any [recvonly or sendrecv] stream described by that offer.

thanks,
-rohan