Thanks Dale,
The problem I have is that I cannot find anything definitive in RFC3261 that
explicitly states that the system cannot accept the 200OK despite the fact it
has no capability to handle the codec. The best I see in the RFC is 'SHOULD'.
To get the code corrected, I really need a clearly
> Hold invite:
>
> [re-INVITE without SDP]
>
> Hold OK with SDP (incoming from ISP) This is sent 3 times.
>
> SIP/2.0 200 OK
> [...]
> v=0
> o=BroadWorks 13783 2 IN IP4 192.168.175.132
> s=-
> c=IN IP4 10.2.1.108
> t=0 0
> m=audio 16460 RTP/AVP 18 101
> a=rtpmap:18 G729a/8000
> a=fmtp:18 annexb=
I apologise if I have been unclear in the posting.
A point to mention is that this vendor (Mitel) do not support 'hold' in the
correct sense. They use 'consultation-hold' or the first stage of a transfer as
their hold mechanism. While I disagree with this approach, it is not the issue
I am figh
Hello,
On 2011-06-29 17:34, Harbhanu wrote:
> For case-1, it will open two offers. Please share how to handle this.
Just repeat the same offer in 200-INVITE (it's wise to do so in any case).
> For case-2, do you mean delay the answer handling for O/A using 2xx, which
> is de-facto reliable??
Ye
For case-1, it will open two offers. Please share how to handle this.
For case-2, do you mean delay the answer handling for O/A using 2xx, which
is de-facto reliable??
***
This e-mail and attachments contain conf
You will have to give more details before any sort of answer is
possible. Some things to specify:
- Does each account have a distinct phone number?
- what sort of peering is there between the carriers?
- how (if at all) is enum used by each carrier?
- what sort of enum are you talking about?
(
Hi Nauman,
It is possible that after one OA, UAC receives another reliable provisional
response but as per Section 3.1.1 of draft
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sipping-sip-offeranswer-18
UAC behavior
1. If the first SDP that the UAC received is included in an an
unre
Please read
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-sipping-sip-offeranswer-18.txt, and
try to understand it before asking more questions like this.
I gave you this reference earlier. I'm pretty certain that all the
questions you have asked are dealt with there.
Thanks,
Paul
On 6/29
Hello,
Wouldn't it be wiser to proceed with the call setup?
The failure to send PRACK (or, more common - to address it correctly)
affects early media setup, but handshaking on 200-INVITE may still be
done properly.
There's a big vendor that implements 3262 incorrectly (like, sends
18x+100rel
Considering that below we have a UAC named - "server"
IMO both the below case should be rejected with failure response.
This is irrespective of whether the response is an offer or an answer. The
reason being, the UAS will not be sure whether the SDP is received reliably
or not. That is the basic t
Ok thank you. I will check this.
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Jun 29, 2011, at 10:18 AM, mosbah abdelkader wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > If a SIP user has 2 SIP accounts: SIPacc1 and SIPacc2 within 2 SIP
> carriers:
> > CARR1 and CARR2. How to use ENUM to
Hi,
>If there is no call forking it should be UPDATE that need
> to be used for modification of offer before 2XX is
> receieved.
Yes it was this case (single dialog) my question was about. Is this a SHOULD or
MUST for UPDATE ie there can NOT be any more OA cycles using 18x- PRACK after
first on
Hi,
On Jun 29, 2011, at 10:18 AM, mosbah abdelkader wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If a SIP user has 2 SIP accounts: SIPacc1 and SIPacc2 within 2 SIP carriers:
> CARR1 and CARR2. How to use ENUM to forward calls destined to SIPacc1 to
> SIPacc2.
>
You may have an internal ENUM tree mapping acc1's PSTN numbe
yes there can be more 18X and PRACK based OA sequence, in case of call forking
scenario.
If there is no call forking it should be UPDATE that need to be used for
modification of offer before 2XX is receieved.
Regards
Sunil Verma
-Original Message-
From: Nauman Sulaiman [mailto:nauman
Thank you. However can you confirn no more OA cycles can take place
using the 18x and PRRACK response after the first one
--- On Wed, 29/6/11, Kumar Verma, Sunil (Sunil) wrote:
> From: Kumar Verma, Sunil (Sunil)
> Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] 18x response after OA complete?
> To: nauman762-h
Hi,
If a SIP user has 2 SIP accounts: SIPacc1 and SIPacc2 within 2 SIP carriers:
CARR1 and CARR2. How to use ENUM to forward calls destined to SIPacc1 to
SIPacc2.
Any other solution is welcome except SIP trunking which requires registering
each SIP account as a SIP client which will decrease the
16 matches
Mail list logo
