[Sip-implementors] Refusing video stream in a SDP

2014-04-10 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
Hi, If you are receiving an INVITE with a SDP offer containing this video stream (along an audio stream not shown): m=video 6964 RTP/AVP 109 a=rtpmap:109 H264/9 a=fmtp:109 profile-level-id=42800d And you want to decline the video stream, what is the right/best way to refuse it: 1. m=

[Sip-implementors] RTP/AVP with crypto attribute

2011-04-09 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
Hi, What is the recommended behavior when you receive a SDP offer with a RTP/AVP media protocol including a crypto attribute ? Ignore the media ? Ignore the crypto attribute ? Process it as a RTP/SAVP when SRTP is locally supported ? In that case answer with a RTP/AVP or change it to a RTP/SAVP

[Sip-implementors] SIP / TCP / INVITE / 100 Trying

2011-03-17 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
Hi, RFC3261 17.2.1 says that a UAS MUST issue a "100 Trying" provisional response to an INVITE. (unless a response is guaranteed to be generated within 200ms) Is there any reason to do it when a reliable transport is being used (TCP) since its only goal is to stop the remote Timer A which doe

Re: [Sip-implementors] Timer J clarification

2011-03-16 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
le R (Dale) wrote: > > From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu > [sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Jean-Hugues > Royer [jhro...@joher.com] > > Unfortunately none of these states that UDP responses M

Re: [Sip-implementors] Timer J clarification

2011-03-16 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
pplying to CANCEL and non-2xx-ACK. > > RFC 3261 section 9.1: "The destination address, port, and transport for the > CANCEL MUST be identical to those used to send the original request." > > RFC 3261 section 17.1.1.2: "The ACK MUST be sent to the same address,

Re: [Sip-implementors] Timer J clarification

2011-03-16 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
Good, this makes it easier to handle then. Would you happen to tell me where in RFC3261 you read that the response MUST be sent by the same transport type than the request ? 18.2.2 doesn't tell it.. (unless the request is over TCP and the TCP connection is still open, which is not the case in m

[Sip-implementors] Timer J clarification

2011-03-16 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
Hi, I would like to have a clarification of the Timer J for a specific scenario. I'm an UAS receiving a non-INVITE request over UDP. I send the final response to it over TCP because its size exceeds the maximum UDP message size (65K). Which transport do I consider (request-UDP response-TCP) to

[Sip-implementors] Register/Subscribe - 200 Response - Expires 0

2010-07-13 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
Hi, When you REGISTER/SUBSCRIBE for the first time and you receive a 200 OK response with an expiration of zero, what are you suppose to do ? Regards. ___ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.e

Re: [Sip-implementors] Target refresh of an INVITE initiated dialog

2010-07-06 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
: > > > IƱaki Baz Castillo wrote: >> 2010/7/6 Jean-Hugues Royer : >>> If a subscription and invite usage are sharing a dialog, sending a >>> refresh SUBSCRIBE with a different contact will cause reINVITEs from >>> the >>> peer to go to that different contact.

[Sip-implementors] Target refresh of an INVITE initiated dialog

2010-07-06 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
Hi, RFC5057 says: Target refresh requests update the remote target of a dialog when they are successfully processed. The currently defined target refresh requests are INVITE, UPDATE, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, and REFER The remote target is part of the dialog state. When a target refresh request affec