[SR-Users] Proposal for dialog: DLG_STATE_EARLY

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

On 6/24/13 1:51 PM, Klaus Darilion wrote:
> On 21.06.2013 19:20, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have some comments related to the patches, as I couldn't dig much into
>> sources due to traveling constraints. See them inline.
>>
>> On 6/14/13 2:10 PM, Halina Nowak wrote:
>>> These modifications were implementated for dialogs having PRACK and 
>>> UPDATE
>>>
>>> --- a/modules/dialog/dlg_handlers.c    Fri Jun 14 13:45:41 2013 +0200
>>> +++ b/modules/dialog/dlg_handlers.c    Fri Jun 14 13:55:24 2013 +0200
>>> @@ -1249,16 +1249,18 @@
>>>      }
>>>
>>>      if ( (event==DLG_EVENT_REQ || event==DLG_EVENT_REQACK)
>>> -    && new_state==DLG_STATE_CONFIRMED) {
>>> +         && (new_state==DLG_STATE_CONFIRMED ||
>>> new_state==DLG_STATE_EARLY)) {
>>
>> This above is to catch PRACK, right? UPDATE should be sent after 200ok,
>> or is allowed also for early dialogs?
>
> Just answering from a protocol point of view, without code review:
>
> The main purpose of UPDATE is to update the sessions although there is 
> a pending INVITE transaction. Thus, yes, UPDATE can be sent although 
> there was no 200 OK to the INVITE yet.
Thanks for clarification, so far the occasion of seeing UPDATE requests 
out there is rather a rare event.

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda