Check RFC 3611, RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP XR).
Thanks
Basu Chikkalli
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 3:56 PM Amanpreet Singh
wrote:
> Hi Fellows,
>
> We are working with our network team for audio/video traffic routing, some
> of the liks are not redundant and failover
Hi All,
A->B2BUA>B
Considering B2BUA and B-Party into session refresh.
Both B2BUA and B support timer.
Refresher is: B2BUA
on 1800/2=900sec, B2BUA sends refresh UPDATE
B2BUA -UPDATE--->B
B2BUA<491B
Due to ra
t; > request, if it is present; otherwise the UAS MAY reduce its value but
> > MUST NOT set it to a duration lower than 90 seconds. The UAS MUST
> > NOT increase the value of the Session-Expires header field.
> >
> > BR/pj
> >
> >
> > Sensiti
Hi All,
A->B2BUA>B
A-Party does not support session.
no Session_Expires,no Min-SE and no Supported:timer
So no session refresh between A and B2BUA.
When B2BUA supports timer.
It sends INVITE to B with following details
B2BUA---INVITE---
; > Now whether AS should consider PANI or not depends upon if AS local
> policy
> > found it inside/outside trusted domain.
> > But this decision should not be based on values preConfigured matching or
> > not on AS nodes.
> >
> > Thanks & regards
> &g
Hi,
Does P-Access-Network-Info Header received in INVITE should be validated?
RFC-7315:
P-Access-Network-Info = "P-Access-Network-Info" HCOLON
access-net-spec *(COMMA access-net-spec)
access-net-spec= (access-type / access-class)
Should we
or an answer), or it
MAY be different
My conclusion is "200-OK will have the codec list already negotiated in the
dialogue" not the list of codec supported by UA
Basu Chikkalli
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:26 AM, ankur bansal wrote:
> Hi Ramesh
>
> Normally it sh
