Subject: [Sipping] Comments on draft-ietf-sipping-nat-scenarios

From: "Elwell, John" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:13:01 +0100

The ICE example shows the initial SDP answer going in the 200 response to
the INVITE message. This is likely to lead to media clipping. I thought the
preferred mechanism is to send the answer in a 183 response, which could be
followed by a 180 response when ICE is complete and the called user is
alerted.

Of course, this is only an example. We seem to lack normative statements on
how to map ICE onto SIP. The mmusic-ice draft is written so as to apply to
anything that uses the offer-answer model - I don't have a problem with
that. The sip-ice-option-tag draft limits itself to the option tag and media
feature tag. Whilst we obviously need some flexibility on the exact mapping
to SIP, the problem with just a single example is that implementers might
take that as the only way to do it. Any opinions?

John

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP