W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > April 2013

Re: [Bug 20816] "Hold" unspecified

From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:30:34 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfmmRSZLthX9=dvCh3=XZox6Ug4DVVfFP0MHW0bqJTuTag@mail.gmail.com>
To: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
2013/4/19 Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>:
> 3) optionally renegotiating as sendonly, but for Hold this is generally a
> Bad Idea, as it mean un-hold requires renegotiation, which is not expected
> by most people

Why/where is that not expected? any SIP device expects that and reacts on that.

BTW sending "a=sendonly" is useful for a PBX that puts on hold a
remote phone and sends "music on hold" during the hold status. A phone
instead usually sends "a=inactive" when putting on hold a remote peer.

Iñaki Baz Castillo
Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 15:31:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:42 UTC