Re: [Sip-implementors] Can REFER take place during reINVITE?

2011-11-21 Thread Paul Kyzivat
On 11/22/11 11:40 AM, Adam Frankel (afrankel) wrote: > Hi All, > > I am seeing a scenario for an established call in which an outbound > reINVITE is being done, the far end is sending a TRYING and then a REFER > immediately. We are rejecting this REFER with a 400 Bad Request because > the INVITE t

Re: [Sip-implementors] Can REFER take place during reINVITE?

2011-11-21 Thread Brandon W. Yuille
That doesn't seem reasonable to me. That's like sending an initial INVITE and receiving a CANCEL request in response instead of a final response. Ie: you don't respond to a request with another request... If you did I can see a scenario where the requests would never end. Brandon Adam Frankel

[Sip-implementors] Can REFER take place during reINVITE?

2011-11-21 Thread Adam Frankel (afrankel)
Hi All, I am seeing a scenario for an established call in which an outbound reINVITE is being done, the far end is sending a TRYING and then a REFER immediately. We are rejecting this REFER with a 400 Bad Request because the INVITE transaction has not been completed. I am not clear whether RE

Re: [Sip-implementors] 200 after [3456]XX in a Proxy client transaction: what to do?

2011-11-21 Thread Iñaki Baz Castillo
2011/11/21 Paul Kyzivat : > Somebody is breaking the rules. I can see of no valid way for this to > occur. The forking proxy should not have let both responses through. Yes, I agree. > So I think you can do whatever you think will work best for you. I think the proxy will consume the 2XX rather

Re: [Sip-implementors] 200 after [3456]XX in a Proxy client transaction: what to do?

2011-11-21 Thread Paul Kyzivat
On 11/22/11 2:04 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: > Hi, imagine a Proxy which first receives a 480 response and forwards > it upstream to the UAC (and receives the ACK) but later, for some > annoying reason, the Proxy receives a 200 for the same client > transaction. > > Should the client discard it?

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer-Answer Query - Related to Slow start INVITE

2011-11-21 Thread Paul Kyzivat
On 11/22/11 1:27 AM, Kumar, Puneet (Puneet) wrote: > Hi All, > > > > I am working on a implementation issue where SIP message flow is: > > > > UAC UAS > > -INVITE w/o SDP> > > <---200 OK w/SDP > > > > Here UAC sends a slow st

[Sip-implementors] 200 after [3456]XX in a Proxy client transaction: what to do?

2011-11-21 Thread Iñaki Baz Castillo
Hi, imagine a Proxy which first receives a 480 response and forwards it upstream to the UAC (and receives the ACK) but later, for some annoying reason, the Proxy receives a 200 for the same client transaction. Should the client discard it? or should it route it? (let's assume that it occurs in the

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer-Answer Query - Related to Slow start INVITE

2011-11-21 Thread Uttam Sarkar (usarkar)
UAC must send ACK with SDP (specifying that media (audio/video/image) port to 0). For details please refer to: http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4317.txt -Original Message- From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of

[Sip-implementors] Offer-Answer Query - Related to Slow start INVITE

2011-11-21 Thread Kumar, Puneet (Puneet)
Hi All, I am working on a implementation issue where SIP message flow is: UAC UAS -INVITE w/o SDP> <---200 OK w/SDP Here UAC sends a slow start INVITE to UAS. UAS replies with a offer in 200OK. Now this 200

[Sip-implementors] Is it valid/legal to IPv4 control channel and IPv6 data channel?

2011-11-21 Thread Michael Lui (milui)
Hi experts, Is it valid/legal to IPv4 control channel and IPv6 data channel? For example, the INVITE exchange is in IPv4 but the IP addresses specified in SDP is IPv6. I don't think this is common but If allow, what is the practical scenario? Thanks, Michael __