Brett Tate wrote:
>> Question is: Should the To in that (re)INVITE
>> contain ';foo=bar' ???
>>
>> AFAIK the contents of that To header are to be generated
>> from dialog state information. The URI and the tag are
>> part of that state, but other header parameters from the
>> original INVITE
> Question is: Should the To in that (re)INVITE
> contain ';foo=bar' ???
>
> AFAIK the contents of that To header are to be generated
> from dialog state information. The URI and the tag are
> part of that state, but other header parameters from the
> original INVITE are not, and hence would n
El Jueves, 18 de Febrero de 2010, Paul Kyzivat escribió:
> Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> > El Miércoles, 17 de Febrero de 2010, Paul Kyzivat escribió:
> >> AFAIK the contents of that To header are to be generated from dialog
> >> state information. The URI and the tag are part of that state, but othe
Offer
v=0
o=- 4 2 IN IP4 192.168.2.103
s=
c=IN IP4 192.168.2.103
t=0 0
m=audio 34362 RTP/AVP 0 101
a=alt:1 1 : hlOLopIA MH2kNKJY 192.168.2.103 34362
a=fmtp:101 0-15
a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
a=sendrecv
a=x-rtp-session-id:E44A2C3559FC4E91BD382CEB4A5EAE0F
Answer
v=0
o=M
Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> El Miércoles, 17 de Febrero de 2010, Paul Kyzivat escribió:
>> AFAIK the contents of that To header are to be generated from dialog
>> state information. The URI and the tag are part of that state, but other
>> header parameters from the original INVITE are not, and
El Miércoles, 17 de Febrero de 2010, Paul Kyzivat escribió:
> AFAIK the contents of that To header are to be generated from dialog
> state information. The URI and the tag are part of that state, but other
> header parameters from the original INVITE are not, and hence would not
> be available f
