http://internetcashflownow.com/novelty.php?id=29&top=91&page=85
___
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
Hi Valdemar ,
I am pasting few lines from 3261. Hope this will clarify your doubt.
*17.1.2.1 Overview of the non-INVITE Transaction
Non-INVITE transactions do not make use of ACK. They are simple
request-response interactions. For unreliable transports, requests
are retransmitted at a
Hi Valdemar,
That is possible. On receiving 100 Trying, UPDATE retransmissions would stop.
However, you have to start a guard timer at application level to handle a
scenario when no response is received from the server.
regards,
Aman Aggarwal
Aricent.
-Original Message-
From: sip-imple
Lets ask Adam to comment on this.
Adam?
Thanks,
Paul
On 11/24/11 7:56 AM, Stefan Sayer wrote:
> o Paul Kyzivat on 11/23/2011 07:17 PM:
>> On 11/23/11 9:21 PM, Robert Szokovacs wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have the following setup: a B2BUA based on sipstack "A" and a
>>> mediaserver,
I thought he said the REFER was in response to his reINVITE, not the
other way around:
"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."
As I said before this seems to be wrong, especially s
o Paul Kyzivat on 11/23/2011 07:17 PM:
> On 11/23/11 9:21 PM, Robert Szokovacs wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have the following setup: a B2BUA based on sipstack "A" and a mediaserver,
>> based on sipstack "B".
>> Themediaserver sends a REFER to the B2BUA which starts to send NOTIFYs
>> according to the pr
On 11/23/11 9:21 PM, Robert Szokovacs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have the following setup: a B2BUA based on sipstack "A" and a mediaserver,
> based on sipstack "B".
> Themediaserver sends a REFER to the B2BUA which starts to send NOTIFYs
> according to the progress of the REFERred call: for example: 100,
Hello ,
We have to send update to change the session :
a) We want it
1 50.987832 10.48.4.2 10.52.39.194 SIP/SDP
Request: UPDATE sip:10.52.39.194:5060;transport=UDP, with session
description
2 50.987832 10.52.39.194 10.48.4.2 SIP/SDP
Status
I dont think there is any rule that prohibits notifies to overlap.
Although as you have stated here, it might get you in trouble if you do
not serialize your transactions. Failure of the REFER due to the NOTIFY
getting a 500 does not terminante the INVITE usage so the call should
still procee
Hi,
I have the following setup: a B2BUA based on sipstack "A" and a mediaserver,
based on sipstack "B".
Themediaserver sends a REFER to the B2BUA which starts to send NOTIFYs
according to the progress of the REFERred call: for example: 100, 183,. 180,
200. One of the NOTIFY gets lost on the n
Hi,
> Therefore, the UAS should not issue the REFER in the first place, but
> rather complete that re-INVITE, and when no INVITE/re-INVITE are in
> progress - send the REFER.
I'd say it's perfectly valid. Nobody forces you to generate an INVITE in
response to a REFER immediately. So I'd reply wi
11 matches
Mail list logo
