Re: [Sip-implementors] nonce and response values in Re-REGISTER: Shouldit be same as previous REGISTER event for auth andauth-int qop options?

2009-03-30 Thread Arnab Biswas
Document: 24229-851.doc 1)Section 5.1.1.4.2 IMS AKA as a security mechanism: On sending a REGISTER request, as defined in subclause 5.1.1.4.1, the UE shall additionally populate the header fields as follows: a) an Authorization header, with: - the username directive set to the value of the

Re: [Sip-implementors] Query related to SDP in 200 OK after UPDATE

2009-01-20 Thread Arnab Biswas
No...the 200 OK for the INVITE should not carry any new offer, since the answer for the offer in the INVITE is already done. If the 200 OK- INVITE contains some SDP that should be same as the answer SDP that was sent in the reliable provisional response (answer1). Thanks, Arnab On Tue, Jan 20,

Re: [Sip-implementors] How does the nonce work with digest auth?

2009-01-09 Thread Arnab Biswas
by the AuC. Thanks, Arnab Biswas On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:41 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo i...@aliax.net wrote: El Jueves, 8 de Enero de 2009, Andrew Wood escribió: Where does the nonce value fit into digest authentication? I thought it was just echoed back in the new invite as an extra security

[Sip-implementors] Diversion header

2008-04-18 Thread Arnab Biswas
Hi All, draft-levy-sip-diversion-08 is the draft which defines Diversion header. But the draft has expired long back. Has it been converted into a RFC? Or SIP defines the diversion header mechanism in some other way? Arnab ___ Sip-implementors mailing

Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP (answer_1)

2008-02-20 Thread Arnab Biswas
://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sipping-sip-offeranswer-05.txt Thanks, Arnab Biswas On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 3:36 PM, geeta soragavi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Yes you are right as per rfc 3261 section 13.2.1. Its as follows , -the offer is in the INVITE, and the answer

[Sip-implementors] If SDP answer in 200 OK is not acceptable.....?

2007-12-19 Thread Arnab Biswas
HI All, If the intial INVITE contains an SDP offer and the next 200 OK for that INVITE carries the answer, but the answer (in the 200 OK) is not acceptable to the originating UA, then what should it do? Should it generate a resonable offer in the ACK (where would be the answer?) and send a fresh

Re: [Sip-implementors] Challenges in IMS/SIP

2007-09-04 Thread Arnab Biswas
PROTECTED] wrote: Arnab Biswas wrote: Hi Dale, Could you please elaborate... Arnab SIP, when it was first conceived, was not intended to replace the PSTN with an IP based alternative. The basic tenets of what SIP is is ... The initiation of sessions within a transport agnostic

[Sip-implementors] Challenges in IMS/SIP

2007-08-24 Thread Arnab Biswas
Hi All, I am just curious to know what are the major challenges SIP is going to face, specifically on its use in the IP Multimedia Subsystem framework. Obviously the greatest challenges in IMS are about the QoS, end to end security and seamless mobility. Incidentally these are the greatest