Kamini Gangwani writes:
> Can anyone help me providing some details regarding implementation of
> DHCP Option 120 on SIP Gateway? I have gone through RFC 3361 but
> unable to get details on message flows through DHCP Server and SIP
> Client.
Have you read the references of RFC 3361? In particul
You can get more details from RFC 3361 .Please check it .
Regards
Ankur Bansal
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Kamini Gangwani <
kamini.gangw...@aricent.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone help me providing some details regarding implementation of DHCP
> Option 120 on SIP Gateway?
> I have gone t
Assume Dialog identifier is :
1. Only call id : Scenarios where call made to itself like self-testing
.here Call-Id is same
but we would need tags to identify caller and callee dialog.
2. CallId and from-tag : Forking scenarios where callId is same for all
early dialogs(A-B1,A-B2) and from-tag al
Just adding more info to Brett's ans,
Callid and from tag are added by source.
To rag is added by destination.
So dialog will be formed by contribution of both end. This would have not
possible if rfc documented as you said.
On Oct 27, 2015 6:03 PM, "Brett Tate" wrote:
> The Call-ID is obvious.
The Call-ID is obvious. The To tag helps handle forking situations.
The From tag used to be optional during call setup. It became mandatory
because a common issue was that devices and operators occasionally
incorrectly classified re-INVITE as INVITE because the To tag was missing
to help with th
We all know a SIP dialog is complete when it comprises of Call-ID, From Tag and
the To Tag.
Why do we have 3 different things to complete a Dialog when we could only have
Call-ID to complete a Dialog
___
Sip-i
