BR/pj
-Original Message-
From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu]
Sent: den 15 november 2018 19:27
To: Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB);
sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
On 11/15/18 12:02 PM, Sundbaum Per-Johan (Te
>
> > G.722 was offered in the initial INVITE to PBX, but was not accepted
> > by PBX, in 200OK from PBX there were only G.711A
> >
> > SDP in INITIAL invite:
> > SDP PDU
> >v=0
> >o=BroadWorks 400693062 1 IN IP4 195.54.102.188
> >s=-
> >c=IN IP4 195.54.102.188
> >t=0 0
> >m
dundancy
>a=sendrecv
>
> BR/pj
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> [mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of
> Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: den 15 november 2018 17:37
> To: sip-implementors@lists.c
: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
On 11/15/18 1:21 AM, Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB) wrote:
I should have given more details, in the example I gave there was actual a
couple of G.722 packets that was marked with payload type
R. Worley
> Sent: den 15 november 2018 05:10
> To: Paul Heitkemper
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
>
> Paul Heitkemper writes:
>> RFC 3550 Section 5.1
>>
>> " A receiver MUST ignore packets
er
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
Paul Heitkemper writes:
RFC 3550 Section 5.1
" A receiver MUST ignore packets with payload types that it does not
understand."
Though this rule is based on the payload type code, and no
: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
Correct -- if the party receiving the G.722 packets did not advertise support
for the G.722 payload type in its SDP stanza, it should just ignore them if
they arrive anyway.
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 06:21:14AM +, Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor
@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Dale R.
> Worley
> Sent: den 15 november 2018 05:10
> To: Paul Heitkemper
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
>
> Paul Heitkemper writes:
> > RFC 3550 Section 5.1
>
Behalf Of Dale R.
Worley
Sent: den 15 november 2018 05:10
To: Paul Heitkemper
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
Paul Heitkemper writes:
> RFC 3550 Section 5.1
>
> " A receiver MUST ignore packets with payload types th
Paul Heitkemper writes:
> RFC 3550 Section 5.1
>
> " A receiver MUST ignore packets with payload types that it does not
> understand."
Though this rule is based on the payload type code, and not the
encoding. The original post says only that the packets contain G.722
data, but if that data is
Sent: den 14 november 2018 05:25
> To: Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
>
> "Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)"
> writes:
>
>> Can someone help me ge
: Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
>
> "Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)"
> writes:
>
>> Can someone help me getting a link to information regard
...@ariadne.com]
Sent: den 14 november 2018 05:25
To: Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload
"Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)"
writes:
> Can someone help me getting a link t
"Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)"
writes:
> Can someone help me getting a link to information regarding how a PBX
> should handle the case when for example the codec G.711A is agreed
> upon, but somehow there are a couple of G.722 packets received that
> have the same ports on UDP level, b
Hi !
Can someone help me getting a link to information regarding how a PBX should
handle the case when for example the codec G.711A is agreed upon, but somehow
there are a couple of G.722 packets received that have the same ports on UDP
level, but clearly belongs to another RTP stream when you l
15 matches
Mail list logo
