Subject: Re: [rtcweb] PRANSWER and 3264

From: kiran kumar <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 18:56:40 +0530

>>In my opinion, a bigger problem is if the browser, after it has received
a JSEP OFFER, starts sending a *PRANSWER/ANSWER sequence. In the case of
SIP interworking, we can't >>simply map those to sequential different SDP
answers - at least not with using the same To tag value.

>>Yes, how to handle things in that direction must also be specified.

>Isn't that up to the application, which presumably knows it's talking to a
SIP gateway, and can just decide to "not do that", just as it decides to
take no action on ICE candidate >callbacks, since SIP doesn't support
trickle candidates?
>          Harald
Hi,

In cases where the signalling uses the existing SIP signalling nodes,
Application may not know about this.
Also application, if uses JSON for example, should be independent of the
signalling protocols (SIP/JINGLE) that arises after the gateway.
I am thinking of to write a draft for JSON-SIP mapping gateway by modifying
ROAP-SIP mapping gateway draft ( Since ROAP may not be used in future),
where the solution for this problem is very much useful.

But if the application is using XMPP/JINGLE and supposed to pass through a
XMPP-SIP gateway, then the solution is more critical.

Thanks,
Kiran.