Dear elision,
Is any device provide this type of configuration check it out what other
product are doing for this?
-Original Message-
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Elison
Niven
Sent: Thursday, Fe
On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 21:16 +, Aaron Clauson wrote:
> Since that would take extra work on the server and the client I'll be a
> heretic and stick to my 184 info response approach for the time being. It's
> not much of a contravention of the standard. A UAS can send back as many
> info responses
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 12:26 +0100, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> Hi, I've some interoperability problems with a PBX sending DTMF events as
> follows:
>
> RFC 2833 RTP Event
> Event ID: DTMF Eight 8 (8)
> 0... = End of Event: False
> .0.. = Reserved: False
> ..00 = V
(I assume you are referring to RFC 5359 section 2.4.)
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 14:17 +0530, Bajaj, Gagandeep wrote:
> Bob sends NOTIFY "terminated" (15th message) to inform Alice that he has
> successfully connected with Carol.
Beware that it in F15, it is not "Subscription-State: terminated" that
4th ACM Conference on Principles, Systems and
Applications of IP Telecommunications
(IPTComm 2010)
http://www.iptcomm.org
August 2-3, 2010
Leibniz Supercomputing Center
Munich, Germany
I
Yes. You could also send to .
Its an active enough place with people that are likely to have insight
into what others are doing.
Thanks,
Paul
Vinay Pande (vipande) wrote:
> Emailing the authors of 4733 sounds like a good 1st step, since this can
> become important as 4733 gains
If you aren't interested in the NOTIFY, you can use the norefersub
option to bypass the subscription altogether.
Alternatively you could use the information about a failure to alert the
transfering user in some way - display a message, blink, etc. From a
practical perspective, I think a user th
Hi
Responses inline
Regards
Ranjit
-Original Message-
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of
Bajaj, Gagandeep
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 2:18 PM
To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject:
Hi
Bob sends NOTIFY "terminated" (15th message) to inform Alice that he has
successfully connected with Carol.
Till Alice gets NOTIFY "terminated", it keeps the dialog details.
My question is:
1) Why after doing an unattended transfer and sending BYE to Bob,
Alice would
Yes ,nice documents.
-Original Message-
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of ext Saúl
Ibarra
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 3:05 AM
To: Charles Shen
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Kumiko O
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:17 AM, Saúl Ibarra wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Alex Hermann wrote:
>> On Friday 26 February 2010 09:04:37 Saúl Ibarra wrote:
>>> I guess that also the fact that SIP specification only requires a UDP
>>> implementation has something to do with the adoption
> Can you please tell me, what significance it makes for a
> SIP client with and without 3GPP extension over an IMS network ?
It depends upon how the client is being used within the network.
> So what happens if i use sip client without 3GPP extension
> over an IMS network ?
It depends upon
El Viernes, 26 de Febrero de 2010, Iñaki Baz Castillo escribió:
> Hi, I've some interoperability problems with a PBX sending DTMF events as
> follows:
>
> RFC 2833 RTP Event
> Event ID: DTMF Eight 8 (8)
> 0... = End of Event: False
> .0.. = Reserved: False
> ..00 =
Hi, I've some interoperability problems with a PBX sending DTMF events as
follows:
RFC 2833 RTP Event
Event ID: DTMF Eight 8 (8)
0... = End of Event: False
.0.. = Reserved: False
..00 = Volume: 0
Event Duration: 0
This DTMF is not recognized by my softswitch
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Alex Hermann wrote:
> On Friday 26 February 2010 09:04:37 Saúl Ibarra wrote:
>> I guess that also the fact that SIP specification only requires a UDP
>> implementation has something to do with the adoption of SIP over TCP.
>
> I don't know what specification you'r
On Friday 26 February 2010 09:04:37 Saúl Ibarra wrote:
> I guess that also the fact that SIP specification only requires a UDP
> implementation has something to do with the adoption of SIP over TCP.
I don't know what specification you're talking about, but rfc3261 section 18
says:
"All SIP eleme
Hi Charles,
> We have actually measured the impact of TLS cost on SIP server performance
> using the OpenSIPS server on an Linux-based intel platform. Between TCP and
> TLS, we see a performance reduction around a factor of two. But if we
> compare the simplest UDP configuration with the most soph
17 matches
Mail list logo
