Re: [Sip-implementors] How to resolve 491 request pending cross over onRe-INVITEs

2010-04-29 Thread sunilkumar.verma
Hi, As per RFC Retry after timer is different for UAS and UAC and hence they both are not going to ReTry after same interval. I hope I got you question right. I am not able to see section in Red. Regards Sunil Verma ESN: 877-5050 Ph: +919731245000 -Original Message- From: sip-imple

[Sip-implementors] RFC 5876 on Updates to Asserted Identity

2010-04-29 Thread Volkan Hatem
Hi, Does RFC5876 describe an alternative method to RFC4916? Or, is it intended to complement RFC4916 in a trusted environment where RFC4474 is not supported, implemented? The following paragraph is from section 3.2:    In one example, an established call passes through a gateway to the    PSTN.

Re: [Sip-implementors] How to resolve 491 request pending cross over on Re-INVITEs

2010-04-29 Thread Brett Tate
> Question is - > > When a re-invite and 491 pending cross over happens on a dialog (call > dialog #2), how do both the UA resolve this. What retry timers are used > to resolve this and is there a draft available that addresses this > issue? See rfc3261 section 14.1's 491 text.

[Sip-implementors] How to resolve 491 request pending cross over on Re-INVITEs

2010-04-29 Thread Dushyant Godse
HI I am sure this has been asked many times but I could not find a definitive thread on how to resolve this. Moreover RFC 3261 section 14.2 is vague about resolving race conditions for Re-INVITEs. You could directly skip over to offending section (in red) below for the issue in question. Here

Re: [Sip-implementors] re-INVITE ACK clarification

2010-04-29 Thread neil corcoran
> > It does look like the recommended behavior when SDP appears in a location where it is unexpected is to ignore it. E.g., the last paragraph of section 3.1.1 draft-ietf-sipping-sip-offeranswer-12: > > The UAS does not include SDP in responses F9 and F12. However, the > UAC should prepare to