Subject: RE: [Sip] comments on sip-connected-identity

From: "Christer Holmberg" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:52:21 +0200

Hi,

Didn't the update-without-sdp come uo a while ago, when we discussed sessions without media etc?

If one simply wants to update the remote target, using uodate, why would it be required to include a body?

Regards,

Christer

_______________________________________________
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: "Brett Tate" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:09:00 -0500

> Didn't the update-without-sdp come up a while 
> ago, when we discussed sessions without media etc?

It has been discussed within various threads in sip and sip-implementors
over the past several years.  Because one of the purposes of UPDATE is to
alter media, some vendors interpreted rfc3311 to indicate UPDATE must
contain an SDP.  However such a requirement is not contained within rfc3311
or rfc4028.

> If one simply wants to update the remote target, using 
> update, why would it be required to include a body?

Per rfc3311, UPDATE is not required to include a body.

However since Jonathan recently suggested otherwise (or I misinterpreted his
email), hopefully he will reply with some clarification or answers for the
following email.

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip/current/msg13593.html