Hi Paul,
Thanks a lot, You have put it in a nice way , I understood the use-case
for Forking
But I have the following question
*This all assumes that the 2xx matches an INVITE transaction you have
pending, and that the from-tag and call-id match what was in the
corresponding INVITE.Otherwise th
On 7/31/17 11:26 AM, Prakash K wrote:
What would be the behavior of UA when 200 OK received which is not matching
the dialog
"200OK received by UA with different Call-id which is not in context"
I see the following snippet in RFC 3261 which says UA should create
dialog. Wont this end up in ack
There is no response for a response. So no 481 will be there.
Rohit Jain
Sent from my iPhone
> On 31-Jul-2017, at 9:31 PM, Prakash K wrote:
>
> How response will be sent for response ?
>
> UA received 200 OK for INVITE which is sent out ,* but 200 OK received is
> with different call-id (wont
How response will be sent for response ?
UA received 200 OK for INVITE which is sent out ,* but 200 OK received is
with different call-id (wont match the context)*
On 31 July 2017 at 21:07, Asim Sulaiman wrote:
> Dear Prakash,
>
> I guess you will get 481 transaction does not exist.
>
>
> Regar
Dear Prakash,
I guess you will get 481 transaction does not exist.
Regards,
Asim Sulaiman
-Original Message-
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Prakash
K
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 7:27 PM
To: sip-im
What would be the behavior of UA when 200 OK received which is not matching
the dialog
"200OK received by UA with different Call-id which is not in context"
I see the following snippet in RFC 3261 which says UA should create
dialog. Wont this end up in acknowledging the hacking?
If the dialog