Hi Paul and Dale,
I just wanted to say thank you for the updates. We haven't got a fully
working solution yet so are not completely sure what the fix will be, but
your input has helped guide our investigation a lot.
On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 15:11, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> David Cu
x27;s very helpful to have this knowledge as a
reference!
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 00:01, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> On 7/23/19 7:38 PM, David Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > I'd just like to check my understanding of your reply. The first
> > SUBSCRIBE is f
ther than using the
Record-Routes in the NOTIFY. It's very helpful to have this knowledge as a
reference!
>
>
> On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 00:01, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>>
>> On 7/23/19 7:38 PM, David Cunningham wrote:
>> > Hi Paul,
>> >
>> > I'
On 7/22/19 7:09 PM, David Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > Thank you for the reply. Below is the full exchange, which hopefully
> > makes things clearer.
>
> Yes it does.
>
> > Ultimately the problem is the SUBSCRIBE at the end
> > which is bein
Thank you very much Paul, we'll try that.
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 13:03, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> On 7/22/19 7:09 PM, David Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > Thank you for the reply. Below is the full exchange, which hopefully
> > makes things clearer.
>
45495431
From: ES8 Test 104 ;tag=Nf5GGb2cl6tUMcx2B18758F8644a2998
To: "798" ;tag=155960081226925
Call-ID: 1552952...@xx.xx.xx.10
CSeq: 877 SUBSCRIBE
Contact:
Max-Forwards: 70
User-Agent: ewb2bua/15.4.3Alpha.2019053
Event: dialog
Expires: 300
Content-Length: 0
On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 at 04:54
.x.x:56095 directly?
Thank you in advance!
--
David Cunningham, Voisonics Limited
http://voisonics.com/
USA: +1 213 221 1092
New Zealand: +64 (0)28 2558 3782
___
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.co
Fair enough. Thank you for all the explanation!
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 16:02, Alex Balashov
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 03:50:01PM +1300, David Cunningham wrote:
>
> > Is that the case always, or only when they're in response to a 200 OK?
>
> There are two kinds o
Is that the case always, or only when they're in response to a 200 OK?
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 14:31, Alex Balashov
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:28:51PM +1300, David Cunningham wrote:
>
> > Thank you. This is where I easily get mixed up, because an ACK sounds
> lik
Thank you. This is where I easily get mixed up, because an ACK sounds like
it should be a reply to the 200 OK.
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 14:21, Alex Balashov
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:16:50PM +1300, David Cunningham wrote:
>
> > Thank you. So I was correct other than mixing
Thank you. So I was correct other than mixing up the Route and Via headers.
Some day I'll get them right...
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 14:10, Alex Balashov
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:08:18PM +1300, David Cunningham wrote:
>
> > OK, so the Contact is the address on the
s, but the request
> URI is set to the remote Contact URI and that is the final hop.
>
> -- Alex
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:48:06PM +1300, David Cunningham wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Could someone please confirm the correct routing of an ACK?
> > A device
: ES8
Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, INFO,
PUBLISH, MESSAGE
Supported: replaces, timer
Contact:
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 337
--
David Cunningham, Voisonics Limited
http://voisonics.com/
USA: +1 213 221 1092
New Zealand: +64 (0)28 2558 3782
n have multiple values following the same name, i.e.:
>
> Route: , ,
>
>
> So preserving order is actually meaningful for values, not so much for the
> full name+values. The following is equivalent in terms of the ordering
> requirements for field values:
>
> R
order of parameters within ONE
> header value. Order of values is important, because it defines your return
> path. Which is why the clause is there, I believe. Order of parameters on
> the other hand has no particular meaning.
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 4:18 PM, David Cunningham <
violating RFC if you don't?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > -Maxim
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Maksym Sobolyev
> Sippy Software, Inc.
> Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts
> Tel (Canada): +1-778-783-0474
> Tel (Toll-Free): +1-855-747-7779
> Fax: +1-866-85
defines lr-param without a value.
>
> RFC 3261 section 16.12.1 has some loose routing and strict routing
> examples which may be of interest.
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-
> > implementors
K. Your
> implementation must insert those two in the ACK. Your ACK appears to only
> insert the top-most route. You, therefore, have two violations here.
> Request-URI is wrong and Route-set is wrong.
>
> Joegen
>
>
>
>
> On 08/22/2015 09:01 AM, David Cunningham wr
060
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
aa.aa.13.240;branch=z9hG4bKa205.5b9b58c0e9cb82ab7edf866d7b03a805.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP aa.aa.13.194:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK45d24b48
Route:
Max-Forwards: 69
From: ;tag=as2e95ab82
To: ;tag=gK08a9c7fd
Contact:
Call-ID: xxx
CSeq: 102 ACK
User-Agent: XXX
Content-Length:
19 matches
Mail list logo
