[Sip-implementors] Offer answer model

Hi Paul/Dale/Ankur, Thanks for your reply. below is the scenario please help resolve it. Below is the updated scenario. sorry for confusion by making step2 as recvonly. now it is fine. The problem here is that after step 9 call becomes audio only. Video disappears.

Re: [Sip-implementors] From Header value is getting changed from 100 trying to 200OK

Hi, The URI is not used for matching in 3261. Concerning responses, neither is Call-ID, To, From, or number within CSeq. So, in order to have better interoperability, you should limit to matching the fields identified by 3261. In my opinion, the matching fields mentioned within RFC 3261

[Sip-implementors] Multiple telephone-event in m line

Hi, I have a SIP client sending below SDP ... m=audio 8178 RTP/AVP 96 97 98 99 100 a=rtpmap:96 AMR-NB/8000 a=fmtp:96 mode-set=0,1,2;mode-change-period=2;mode-change-capability=2;mode-change-neighbor=1;max-red=0 a=rtpmap:97 AMR-WB/16000 a=fmtp:97

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer answer model.... Updated

On 6/23/15 10:23 PM, isshed wrote: Hi Paul, Below is the updated scenario. sorry for confusion by making step2 as recvonly. now it is fine. The problem here is that after step 9 call becomes audio only. Video disappears.

Re: [Sip-implementors] Multiple telephone-event in m line

On 6/24/15 9:28 AM, Gaurav Khare wrote: Hi, I have a SIP client sending below SDP ... m=audio 8178 RTP/AVP 96 97 98 99 100 a=rtpmap:96 AMR-NB/8000 a=fmtp:96 mode-set=0,1,2;mode-change-period=2;mode-change-capability=2;mode-change-neighbor=1;max-red=0 a=rtpmap:97 AMR-WB/16000 a=fmtp:97

Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer answer model.... Updated

Thanks Paul. For details reply. Please find my response inline. On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Paul Kyzivat pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu wrote: On 6/23/15 10:23 PM, isshed wrote: Hi Paul, Below is the updated scenario. sorry for confusion by making step2 as recvonly. now it is fine. The problem