On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 16:46 +0200, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> Hi, I've a PBX acting also as dialog presence server. Users are not
> local, they exist in a proxy in front of the PBX.
>
> When the PBX (a B2BUA) sends an "INVITE sip:al...@domain" to the
> proxy, the PBX inmediately sends a NOTIFY to
El Martes 31 Marzo 2009, Brett Tate escribió:
> you can ask the vendor to provide more configurable control over NOTIFYs
> that might be useless.
It's not just useless, but annoying since the subscriber does receive the
NOTIFY and renders it to the human by blinking a led an doing a short ring.
be useless.
> -Original Message-
> From: Iñaki Baz Castillo [mailto:i...@aliax.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 12:24 PM
> To: Brett Tate
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] [dialog presence] Is correct a NOTIFY
>
&
2009/3/31 Brett Tate :
> The B2BUA might be attempting to simulate a "virtual" situation as mentioned
> within RFC 4235 section 3.7.2.
This is not useful at all in my case. The fact is that the subscriber
receives a NOTIFY (state=early) so during a milisecond it renders it
to the human (sounds a
z
> Castillo
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:13 AM
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] [dialog presence] Is correct a NOTIFY
>
> 2009/3/31 Vivek Batra :
> > From UAS core prespective of B2BUA, dialog state goes to *Trying* on
sts.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Iñaki Baz
> > Castillo
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:13 AM
> > Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] [dialog presence] Is correct a NOTIFY
> >
> > 2009/3/31 Vivek Batra :
> >
: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 11:13 AM
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] [dialog presence] Is correct a NOTIFY
>
> 2009/3/31 Vivek Batra :
> > From UAS core prespective of B2BUA, dialog state goes to *Trying* on
> reciept
> > of
2009/3/31 Vivek Batra :
> From UAS core prespective of B2BUA, dialog state goes to *Trying* on reciept
> of INVITE and if provisional response is sent by B2BUA with tag, dialog
> state reaches to *Early*, that's what happening in your case (i believe that
> B2BUA responds with provisional response
2009/3/31 Vikram Chhibber :
> There is no early state if you have not received 1xx with to tag
> (excluding 100 trying), therefore IMO PBX behavior is incorrect.
Thanks. Could you clarify me if this subject is explained in RFC 4235?
(If so I will look for it).
Thanks again.
--
Iñaki Baz Castil
ts.cs.columbia.edu
> [mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Iñaki
> Baz Castillo
> Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 8:16 PM
> To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: [Sip-implementors] [dialog presence] Is correct a NOTIFY
> beforeringing?
>
Hi I?aki,
>From UAS core prespective of B2BUA, dialog state goes to *Trying* on reciept
of INVITE and if provisional response is sent by B2BUA with tag, dialog
state reaches to *Early*, that's what happening in your case (i believe that
B2BUA responds with provisional response with tag). Hence, t
*
-Original Message-
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Iñaki Baz
Castillo
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 8:16 PM
To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: [Sip-implementors] [dialog presence] Is correct a
Hi, I've a PBX acting also as dialog presence server. Users are not
local, they exist in a proxy in front of the PBX.
When the PBX (a B2BUA) sends an "INVITE sip:al...@domain" to the
proxy, the PBX inmediately sends a NOTIFY to the subscribers for the
dialog activity of Alice:
early
But t
13 matches
Mail list logo
