No, 200OK retransmission is stopped until ACK's arrival or 64*T1. PRACK has no
impact on this.
Check RFC3261 sec 13.3.1.4
fyi
-Rockson
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Siddhardha Garige
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 3:16 PM
To: sip-im
Hello all,
I have a question regarding retransmission of 200OK.
Proxy can send 100 Trying to stop retransmission on invites on UAC
is there any way to control retransmission of 200OK from UAS?
Is this a valid senario? Will PRACK stop retransmission of 200Ok messages?
UAC ---Proxy -
Hello all,
I have a question regarding retransmission of 200OK.
UAC ---Proxy --UAS
Invite->
<--100 trying-
<180 ringing--
Romel Khan wrote:
>
> If an INVITE contains an initial offer, per RFC3261 "the answer MUST be
> in a reliable non-failure message from UAS back to UAC The UAC MUST
> treat the first session description it receives as the answer, and MUST
> ignore any session descriptions in subsequent respo
If an INVITE contains an initial offer, per RFC3261 "the answer MUST be
in a reliable non-failure message from UAS back to UAC The UAC MUST
treat the first session description it receives as the answer, and MUST
ignore any session descriptions in subsequent responses to the initial
INVITE."
I would like to bring to your attention a new initiative in the SIP
Forum to make recommendations on and stimulate implementation and
deployment of a basic UA configuration mechanism. The SIP configuration
framework (draft-ietf-sipping-config-framework-15) is now pretty mature
and some server and d
You are correct.
I think 3311 was talking about "early" vs "confirmed" when it said
"state of the dialog", but clearly the text
could be improved to avoid conflation with "dialog state" (meaning
call-id, cseqs, targets, routeset, etc.)
I'll capture this as a bug for future clarification. I
UPDATE RFC3311 mentions it does not affect dialog state (eg in Abstract:
"has no impact on the state of a dialog"). But the RFC later mentions
that UPDATE can update remote target (eg quote: "UPDATE is a target
refresh request. As specified in RFC 3261 [1], this means that it can
update the remote
Tapan Kumar Biswal wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I am facing some problem like "404 not found" while doing VoIP
> call in my LAB set up
>
> Observation & Set Up details:
> *
> 1. My VoIP Test bed is comprising of Freeware SIP server
> (Brekeke 2.1.
Hi all
I am facing some problem like "404 not found" while doing VoIP
call in my LAB set up
Observation & Set Up details:
*
1. My VoIP Test bed is comprising of Freeware SIP server
(Brekeke 2.1.6.6.) & my VoIP enabled CPE
HI,
Could some one give me some pointers about sip pay phone .
Also any widely used call flow is there?
How will it interpret Charging pulses from exchange/equivalent (if
needed) .
Regards
Mahesh
___
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@lis
Have been working on SBC, but haven't seen the RFC 4145 usage so far.
Regards,
Somesh S Shanbhag
M G L Bangalore
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Raghavendra Kamath
Sent: Wed 11/5/2008 3:06 PM
To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: [Sip-implementors]
Hi All,
We are in the process of implementing BFCP for the purpose of floor
control in video presentation.
The draft that defines this is RFC 4582.
But I see that this spec requires exchange of BFCP protocol messages
over TCP.
I would like to know from anyone about what is the feasibility of this
13 matches
Mail list logo
