Subject: [Sip] Re: REGISTRAR behavior

From: Raja Chilla <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:23:07 -0800

>
> Guess this has been asked before. Can REGISTRAR lower the expiration
> interval in expires field (from one requested by client originally) in its
> 200 OK response? Note there is no 423 response to client's REGISTER request
> just 200OK with lowered expiration value. RFC3261 referring section would
> help in any case.
> -Raja
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

---

From: "Dale R. Worley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 14:03:32 -0500

On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 15:23 -0800, Raja Chilla wrote:
>         Guess this has been asked before. Can REGISTRAR lower the
>         expiration interval in expires field (from one requested by
>         client originally) in its 200 OK response? 

RFC 3261 section 10.3 item 7: "The registrar MAY choose an expiration
less than the requested expiration interval.  If and only if the
requested expiration interval is greater than zero AND smaller than one
hour AND less than a registrar-configured minimum, the registrar MAY
reject the registration with a response of 423 (Interval Too Brief)."

Dale