Subject: RE: one-way media with 183 Session Progress

From: "Matt Squire" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:14:54 -0500

At 05:00 PM 11/30/99 -0500, David R. Oran wrote:
>> Well, Matts objection remains though: whether it would be "better" to
>> just establish a regular SIP connection right away, play the media, and
>> then possibly transfer the call later.
>>
>Then would you argue that the 182QUEUED response is unecessary as well?
>

I certainly do not argue that 182Queued is unnecessary.  Nor have I argued
that 183 is unnecessary.  Using 183 to establish preconditions (QoS,
security) for a media session is great.  I'm all for it.  

I just don't see a media session as a precondition for a media session.  If
the signalling response has semantics that can be interpreted by the
signalling layer, like 182, great.  If media is being sent back to a higher
layer that has to intepret the media and then filter some appropriate
actions back down the stack, then I'd say a media session was established.
A normal media session.  Not a half-session, not an early media session, an
honest-to-goodness media flow was established.  And I question why we need
to signal it in a different way.  

- Matt