Hi SB,
Android has sip support.
Please refer http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/sip.html
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Sungbum Lim wrote:
> Hello..
>
> I am planning to develop an Android app.
>
> please suggest me a good comme
Hi Chozhan,
Have you checked http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4168 .
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Chozhan A wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When SIP messages are sent over SCTP multi-homed transport, there is a
> possibility that because of path failure SIP message ma
ail about Bit Rate?
>
>
>
>
> regards
> Satya
> ___
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
--
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
_
. . . . . . . . 80
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Raphael Tryster <
raphael.trys...@teledata-networks.com> wrote:
> Pranab,
>
> I changed the subject because these postings are supposed to help not
> only the person who asks, but also others who scan the arch
, only when a retransmission of the
request is received. This is why request retransmissions need to
continue even after a provisional response; they are to ensure
reliable delivery of the final response.*
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Aman Aggarwal
wrote:
>
RFC 3261.
spot on.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Manoj Priyankara [TG] wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Please help me understand the use of phone-context field in the From
> header of the INVITE. Is it globally significant? How to process the
> INVITE coming to
Hi Peter ,
For me "to confirm the dialog and send a BYE immediately" is the better
option.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Peter Krebs wrote:
> Good afternoon,
>
> I have a question concerning the processing of ACK requests sent on 2xx
> respons
n't render this call's state changes to user and
automatically try to tear the call or just remove it after timer
expires.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Brett Tate wrote:
>> I have a question regarding the termination of a call
>> establishment
.
Please go through Sh interface APIs of IMS.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Manoj Priyankara [TG]
wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Apologies if I'm asking something out of the scope of this forum.
> However I believe there are IMS experts who can advice me on the
Hi Kalpesh ,
To understand SIP MESSAGE handing in network, please go through RFC
5438 : Instant Message Disposition Notification.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2010/12/24 Saúl Ibarra Corretgé :
>> From the UAS part perspective i
Hi Priya ,
Session timer is restarted for each update request.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Tarun2 Gupta wrote:
>
> Hi Priya
>
> IMO, the version number in the 'o' line of SDP can be used to determine
> whether the SDP is a new offer or
Hi Alex,
The proxy is not sip v1 compatible. Please go through "proxy behavior
while receiving request" section 16.4 in 3261.
It should check for its own entry in request uri.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Alex Balashov
wrote:
> On 07/30/2010 04:59 AM, W
t dialog).
http://bugs.sipit.net/show_bug.cgi?id=706
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:25 PM, $...@r\/|>r!`/@
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This problem occurs not only in ReInvite but in INVITE transactions also.
> Its a bug in SIP and has been reported as well. In our implementation,
Hi Ranganathan,
Just think of some good value you can put in this header when the
other side is an IVR, would that value work for normal calls also.
The sip stack I worked on are using some kind of timer C for UACs also.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 1:57 AM, M. Ranganathan
either
modify the From header field to remove the identification information,
or add a Privacy header field set to "user".
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Vivek Talwar wrote:
> Hi Sumit,
>
>
>
> If the originating user wishes to override the default sett
Hi Vivek ,
Just check sec 4.5.2.1 of 3gpp doc shared by you.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 7:02 PM, wrote:
> Hi Vivek,
>
> I feel the proxy endpoint which is removing the PAI must have taken care of
> this as well.
> If you go thorugh privacy RFC it takes of
Hi Vivek ,
user-identity in From header is also anonymitize by that entity which
apply privacy rule.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Vivek Talwar wrote:
> Yes question was regarding UAS not receiving PAI. Servers hosting privacy
> service sometimes remove PAI (R
If you want to use keep-alive thing for a INVITE dialog then there is
a RFC for session refreshment procedure.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Avasarala Ranjit-A20990
wrote:
>
> U could use OPTIONS for keep alive (equivalent of PING).
>
>
> R
thats true :)
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> El Miércoles, 10 de Febrero de 2010, sumit jindal escribió:
>> just one correction to Inaki's last response,
>> New request can have Routh header . As in IMS new invite has route to
>> regis
just one correction to Inaki's last response,
New request can have Routh header . As in IMS new invite has route to
registrar(S-CSCF).
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> El Miércoles, 10 de Febrero de 2010, Couret Tabt escribió:
>>
Hi ,
The request will take that path itself , like some new request.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Couret Tabt wrote:
> Thank you, Castillo.
>
> I mean below:
>
> A UAC can NOT know an originator of 407.
> But UAC can send back INVITE to the origin
hanging usages you can have some strategy.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Dushyant Dhalia
wrote:
> The scenario is as follows -
>
> 1. UAC sends SUBSCRIBE.
> 2. Proxy forwards SUBSCRIBE to the NOTIFIER.
> 3. NOTIFIER sends 200 (OK) which is received by the UAC
cks I have work on.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 4:30 PM, KEERTHI KUMAR wrote:
>
> Hi Attila,
> Firsly thanks for your response; in my current setup, the
> application using my SIP Stack has the support of STUN client.
>
> As per my current info,
Hi Dushyant,
One way is to forcefully terminate that trasaction and let UE retransmit
Register and handle this register as fresh one.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Dushyant Dhalia <
dushyant.dha...@rancoretech.com> wrote:
> The scenario is a
Hello Priyank,
I think it's same as coma seperated values.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:21 PM, priyank luthra wrote:
> Hi
> What would be the behaviour of a proxy/Registrar receiving a REGISTER with
> multiple path headers, like
&
If unreliable 1xx response contains a SDP then that's not an actual answer,
uac must wait for reliable 1xx (containing SDP) or 200.
Now if TO tags is different for 183 and 180 then both dialogs should be
handled separately.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Aryan
Hi Aryan,
whichever is first reliable 1xx (out of 180 and 183 ) response containing
SDP.
Regards,
Sumit Jindal
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Aryan wrote:
> Hi All,
> If UAC receives 183/SDP, then it also receives 180/SDP, then which SDP
> should be accepted as answer ?
>
27 matches
Mail list logo
