[Jingle] Typo and possible clarification in XEP 0166

Robert McQueen robert.mcqueen at collabora.co.uk
Mon Apr 20 17:05:56 CDT 2009


Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> No existing session
> 
>     If there is no existing session and both parties simultaneously send
> a Jingle session-initiate message, the action with the lower of the two
> session IDs MUST overrule the other action, where by "lower" is meant
> the session ID that is sorted first using "i;octet" collation as
> specified in Section 9.3 of RFC 4790 [27].

Presumably Justin's issue is just about people audio calling each other
at the same time. So, this should probably contain wording about the
same content type(s). If I send you a file when you're calling me,
neither should fail. I almost wonder if this shouldn't be in the RTP
description XEP, given I can't think why the semantics are otherwise
desirable, and I do also wonder whether these semantics are specific to
RTP calling clients and should be carefully worded to avoid making
certain implementations (which do trunking or other call-switching
activities?) XEP-incompliant by design.

Regards,
Rob

-- 
Robert McQueen                                 +44 7876 562 564
Director, Collabora Ltd.             http://www.collabora.co.uk


More information about the Jingle mailing list