Re: [Sip-implementors] Query regarding

2017-02-26 Thread Alok Tiwari
Hi Rohit, As per your description, I understand that PAI header is received in multiple lines. Please refer RFC-3261, section 7.3.1 Header Field Format to check whether your header format is correct. Hope you will get the fix. Thanks, Alok On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Rohit Jain wrote:

Re: [Sip-implementors] URI value mandatory for Alert-Info?

2015-05-11 Thread Alok Tiwari
mandatory in Alert Info. I am not sure if there is any SIP Stack is lenient about it. Thanks, Alok Tiwari On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 6:42 AM, Alex Balashov wrote: > Hello, > > The ABNF grammar for Alert-Info is: > >Alert-Info = "Alert-Info" HCOLON alert-param *(COMMA aler

Re: [Sip-implementors] replies to ACK

2015-04-03 Thread Alok Tiwari
​Hi Andrea, UAS should simply ignore the malformed ACK messages. Since the ACK message is malformed, UAS will re-transmit the 400 response of INVITE for 32 seconds. Thanks, Alok Tiwari​ On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Andrea wrote: > Hi, > we are facing an issue where a malformed

Re: [Sip-implementors] 503 with interesting extension

2015-02-11 Thread Alok Tiwari
Hi Frank, Refer RFC-3326 for detailed information about Reason header. Thanks, Alok Tiwari On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:16 PM, wrote: > Dear all, > > I have a BYE with a strange reason header. > > What does (1:211) mean here ? > BYE > sip:j4fq9ovk@x.x

Re: [Sip-implementors] Cancelling a call before Provisional response

2014-12-30 Thread Alok Tiwari
; Thanks, Alok Tiwari​ On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Anjan Naik wrote: > HI All, > > I have a query regarding Cancelling a call before Provisional response. > > As per RFC 3261, CANCEL can be sent after a provisional response (1xx > response other than 100) receivecd. Su

Re: [Sip-implementors] ReINVITE offer answer failure

2014-12-04 Thread Alok Tiwari
Hi Vivek, Here the issue is media is not in sync. If UAS is not providing the SDP in answer, how UAC can ensure whether the ongoing media is reliable anymore and if the session is not reliable, it should not be continued. Thanks, Alok Tiwari On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Banda, Srinivas

Re: [Sip-implementors] ReINVITE offer answer failure

2014-12-04 Thread Alok Tiwari
Hi Tarun, IMO, this behavior is correct as it violates the offer-answer model. The answer must have overlapped SDP. But in mentioned scenario, the media at UAC and UAS is not in sync and therefore UAC should terminate the dialog in such scenario. Thanks, Alok Tiwari On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 12

Re: [Sip-implementors] offer answer model

2014-01-09 Thread Alok Tiwari
ays the same or increases. Deleted media streams from a previous SDP MUST NOT be removed in a new SDP; however, attributes for these streams need not be present" Thanks, Alok Tiwari On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:11 PM, isshed wrote: > Hi All, > > Below is offer answer