> On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 7:33 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
>
>> Zuniga, Guillermo writes:
>> > I Access enviroment not PEER to PEER connection, CONTACT could be
>> > anonymous or always should be any valid uri-user?
>>
>> The Contact always has to be a valid URI. However, that URI does not
>> have
Alex Balashov writes:
> Due to the way the RTP relay works on the server side, this results in
> two different SDP offers from the two respective outgoing branches being
> sent back to the caller:
>
> 1. 183+SDP on branch #1.
>
> 2. 183+SDP' on branch #2.
>200 OK+SDP' on branch #2.
>
> I am
Well, the first branch is disposed of with a 5xx reply. But the UAC cancels
nothing, in spite of getting two different early responses from two different
dialogs.
Granted, I haven't tried waiting around for 3 minutes or whatever the maximum
prescribed early/alerting state is.
On July 16,
It should be noted that the UA with which I am testing (Freeswitch) does
not CANCEL or otherwise hang up the first dialog.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 01:56:34PM -0400, Alex Balashov wrote:
> Oh, yes — they're different dialogs, for sure. I just wasn't sure if
> that would nevertheless pose a
Oh, yes — they're different dialogs, for sure. I just wasn't sure if
that would nevertheless pose a problem for some low-budget UAs.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 01:47:32PM -0400, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> On 7/16/18 1:17 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a scenario where a call is forked
On 7/16/18 1:17 PM, Alex Balashov wrote:
Hi,
I have a scenario where a call is forked through a proxy to an early
media announcement server and then subsequently to a SIP provider for
actual termination.
Due to the way the RTP relay works on the server side, this results in
two different SDP
Hi,
I have a scenario where a call is forked through a proxy to an early
media announcement server and then subsequently to a SIP provider for
actual termination.
Due to the way the RTP relay works on the server side, this results in
two different SDP offers from the two respective outgoing
