Hi All,
If a UA receives a request in a spiralled way then shouldn't the
From Tag and Call-ID same as the originated request?
Should the UA accept the received request as spiral if call-ID is
same and From tag is different? Please let me know if there is any business
use case of
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-
implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Suresh
Arunachalam
How do we handle fragmented packets on SIP. I have been having problem
of
handling Notifiication message with over MTU size. Often the dialog
state
Hi, an existing and very extended privative and diabolic VoIP protocol
has a cool feature about voice conference:
1) alice is speaking with bob.
2) alice decide to invite carol to the conference.
3) carol receives a call and shows the number of the participants
(alice and bob).
With the current
On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 15:54 +0530, shyam wrote:
Hi All,
Can I simulate the below call flow using SipProxy Server (Partysip or
siproxd).
CSCF PROXY AS
INV---
--INV---
2009/8/31 Stefan Sayer stefan.sa...@iptego.de:
Hi Iñaki,
o Iñaki Baz Castillo [08/31/09 13:23]:
Hi, an existing and very extended privative and diabolic VoIP protocol
has a cool feature about voice conference:
1) alice is speaking with bob.
2) alice decide to invite carol to the
True, UDP flow may not be required if TCP flow has been setup to route
incoming traffic towards UA. But Won't it be an additional bonus if UA
creates a UDP FLOW in addition to TCP FLOW, so that network can still
reach the UA over the other transport FLOW when one FLOW is down (Unless
if both FLOWs
o Iñaki Baz Castillo [08/31/09 15:45]:
2009/8/31 Stefan Sayer stefan.sa...@iptego.de:
Hi Iñaki,
o Iñaki Baz Castillo [08/31/09 13:23]:
Hi, an existing and very extended privative and diabolic VoIP protocol
has a cool feature about voice conference:
1) alice is speaking with bob.
2)
On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 22:33 +0800, Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563 wrote:
True, UDP flow may not be required if TCP flow has been setup to route
incoming traffic towards UA. But Won't it be an additional bonus if UA
creates a UDP FLOW in addition to TCP FLOW, so that network can still
reach the UA
On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 12:31 -0400, Scott Lawrence wrote:
On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 22:33 +0800, Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563 wrote:
True, UDP flow may not be required if TCP flow has been setup to route
incoming traffic towards UA. But Won't it be an additional bonus if UA
creates a UDP FLOW in
2009/8/31 Stefan Sayer stefan.sa...@iptego.de:
Sorry but I don't understand. How could it be useful? what about
dynamically created conferences? Nobody can expect that carol is
when you get the INVITE, you can fetch the status of the dynamically created
conference (subscribe with expires 0),
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Yong Xinyong@radisys.com wrote:
Hi,
The RFC3261 is clear that UA can not send a re-INVITE when another
INVITE is pending. However, for non-INVITE request (e.g.: INFO), I was
not able to find any restriction like this. So I assume this is allowed.
Yong Xin wrote:
Hi,
The RFC3261 is clear that UA can not send a re-INVITE when another
INVITE is pending. However, for non-INVITE request (e.g.: INFO), I was
not able to find any restriction like this. So I assume this is allowed.
However, sending another INFO before the previous one
12 matches
Mail list logo
