Hi Paul, Thanks!!. Yes i checked 3264 and it says it should be increment by 1.
However i am more concerned that if there is re invite and in 200 OK SDP(in the correspondence of re-invite) there is no change as compare to previous SDP then also <session-version> should increment by 1? Regards, Nitin Kapoor On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Paul Kyzivat <[email protected]> wrote: > On 7/14/14 6:14 PM, NK wrote: > >> Dear All, >> >> I have query regarding the Session version in SDP. I know if we are making >> any changes in SDP then from 183 to 200OK with SDP then there will be >> increment in session version from 183 <session version = 1> to 200 OK >> <session-version=2>. However i have 2 doubt as below. Can you please help >> me on this. >> >> 1) Is that Value should be increment by 1 only? I mean suppose in 183 >> w/SDP we have Session Version =1 , then is that mandatory that we should >> have "session-version=2" or it can be 3 directly. OR >> >> 2) if in 183 w/SDP and 200 Ok we had the same value but when "re-invite >> happened then SDP was same but "session-version" value incremented from 1 >> ==>3 directly. I feel it should be 2 (i mean increment by 1 only). Please >> advise if my understanding is correct. >> > > RFC 3264 requires that it be incremented by 1. But if you are on the > receiving side I suggest you be lenient about this. > > Thanks, > Paul > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
