Hi Paul, > Does the request include *any* Allow header field? No request do not have any Allow header.
Thanks, Puneet -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 9:54 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Outgoing REFER but no support for incoming NOTIFY. On 10/24/13 10:37 AM, Kumar, Puneet (Puneet) wrote: > Hi All, > > I am seeing a case where UAC sends an in-dialog REFER but do not include > "Allow: NOTIFY". > Due to this UAS is not able to send a NOTIFY with sipfrag back to UAC. > > Is this valid? > What can be use case for not supporting NOTIFY? Does the request include *any* Allow header field? RFC 3261 says: The absence of an Allow header field MUST NOT be interpreted to mean that the UA sending the message supports no methods. Rather, it implies that the UA is not providing any information on what methods it supports. There is a mechanism (RFC 4488) for suppressing the implicit subscription from REFER. If that is used than no NOTIFY would be expected. If the REFER does have an Allow without NOTIFY, and it doesn't disable the subscription, then it seems to be in error. Thanks, Paul _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
