No MSRP 200

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. start a Chat
2. Look to the TCP-Packeges sent

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
One should see that MSRP SEND Messages are confirmed with MSRP 200 OK Messages.
No MSRP 200 OK Messages are sent.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
Version 2.3.0 on Android 2.2 and 2.3.4

Please provide any additional information below.
-

Original issue reported on code.google.com by j.copenh...@gmail.com on 15 Sep 2011 at 10:00

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Sorry, read across the rfc4975 and found ther is no need to send MSRP 200 OK if 
Failure-Report is set to no. Was confused about the drawings in RCSe 
Specification and my tcpdump...

Original comment by j.copenh...@gmail.com on 15 Sep 2011 at 10:48

[GoogleCodeExporter]

You are welcome.
We have deactivated MSRP 200 OK for end-to-end performance reason, but we need 
final MSRP REPORT because download link and upload link have not the same 
bandwidth.

Original comment by jmauffret@gmail.com on 15 Sep 2011 at 11:54

• Changed state: Done

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi,
Can you please clarify me in which section of the RFC 4975 is indicated that 
there is no need to send 200OKs in case Failure-Report is set to no. I'm trying 
to find it, but with no success.
I was under the impression that the 200 OKs were mandatory. Only the REPORTs 
would be optional or not in case they were set to "yes" or "no".

Thanks in advance,
Luis

Original comment by LuisFilS...@gmail.com on 28 Mar 2012 at 1:32

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I've found the statement below in the RFC, but I thought it was only for error 
scenarios:

   If the endpoint receives a SEND request with a Failure-Report header
   field value of "no", then it MUST NOT send a failure REPORT request,
   and MUST NOT send a transaction response.  If the value is "partial",
   it MUST NOT send a 200 transaction response to the request, but
   SHOULD send an appropriate non-200 class response if a failure
   occurs.

Original comment by LuisFilS...@gmail.com on 28 Mar 2012 at 1:35

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I've read this more carefully I now I can see that there is no need......

Sorry for the spam.

Original comment by LuisFilS...@gmail.com on 28 Mar 2012 at 1:43