[Jingle] Call forking

Justin Uberti juberti at google.com
Thu Oct 15 15:26:33 CDT 2009


On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im>wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/15/09 12:45 PM, Florian Zeitz wrote:
> > Justin Uberti wrote:
> >> That's my opinion as well.
> >
> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im
> >> <mailto:stpeter at stpeter.im>> wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/15/09 12:03 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> >>> On 10/15/09 11:56 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> >>>> Are there any issues with <cancel/>? That seems like what we want
> >> here.
> >
> >>> +1
> >> I mean, we can define a special reason for <session-accepted-elsewhere/>
> >> or something like that if we really want to, but I don't really see the
> >> need.
> >
> >> Peter
> >
> > <insert rant about evil top posters here />
>
> Agreed. :)
>

Blame it on Gmail :-p

>
> > I personally think we want <alternative-session/> if we use anything
> > that is already there.
> > I think a reason of cancel would suggest that the caller was waiting to
> > long and decided to hang up (i.e. it would log a missed call which we
> > don't want to happen here).
>

I think that would be <success/>. It is a normal hang-up.

 > "The party prefers to use an existing session with the peer rather than
> > initiate a new session" sounds pretty much like what's the case here...
>
> That seems sensible. IIRC we thought that <alternative-session/> would
> be used for communications between the same full JID pair ("hey, why are
> you starting a new session, we've already got one!") but I suppose it
> could be used for bare JID pairs as well ("hey, sorry about that, I'd
> like to retract the offer because you answered from a different resource").
>



More information about the Jingle mailing list