Re: [Sip-implementors] Handling of message cross over between 200OK(INVITE) and 200OK(PRACK)

Dinoop writes: >UAC B2BUA UaB > | 1:INVITE(SDP) || > +--->|| > | 2:100[INV] || > |<---+

[Sip-implementors] (no subject)

Remove my email from the list of SIP-implementors please, Thank a lots. ** **martinwan...@gmail.com * ** ___ Sip-implementors mailing list

Re: [Sip-implementors] Handling of message cross over between 200OK(INVITE) and 200OK(PRACK)

Thanks Worley and Paul, My scenario is, UAC B2BUA UaB | 1:INVITE(SDP) || +--->|| | 2:100[INV] || |<---+

Re: [Sip-implementors] Handling of message cross over between 200OK(INVITE) and 200OK(PRACK)

Dinoop, On 5/26/17 4:50 AM, Dinoop wrote: Thanks Worley and Paul, My scenario is, UAC B2BUA UaB | 1:INVITE(SDP) || +--->|| | 2:100[INV] |

[Sip-implementors] Message Body in SIP ACK is NOT SDP

Hi, So the scenario is that SDP offer/answer exchange has already happened in INVITE and 200 OK.Now ACK is received with some unsupported Content-type and message body.What should be the B2BUA behaviour? - Should message body be removed before ACK is passed on to UAC side?- Should call be

Re: [Sip-implementors] answer RTP/AVPF to offer RTP/AVP

Hi, Never mind. Since the RFC 5939 negotiation mechanism was being used within call flow associated with my question, it is valid from an offer/answer perspective. > -Original Message- > From: Brett Tate [mailto:br...@broadsoft.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 12:56 PM > To: