I'm almost certain that what you want is the mechanism Olle described,
that if the registrar supports the feature, then it it sends "Supported:
xxx" in the response to the REGISTER, and the CPE (UAC) determines
whether to activate the feature based on the presence or absence of
"xxx".
It might
I just thought about it a bit more and Dale is right. I believe the *Require
*header should be enough. The REGISTER can be sent to the Registrar server
from UAC with the Require header containing the feature name. If the
Registrar server supports this, it will respond with a 401. Otherwise the
> On 16 Aug 2018, at 16:44, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>
> On 8/16/18 1:21 AM, Sreekanth wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 08:31, Dale R. Worley wrote:
>>> Sreekanth writes:
I am going through the SIP RFC (3261) and couldn't find anything
>>> specified
regarding the 401 Unauthorized
On 8/16/18 1:21 AM, Sreekanth wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 08:31, Dale R. Worley wrote:
Sreekanth writes:
I am going through the SIP RFC (3261) and couldn't find anything
specified
regarding the 401 Unauthorized challenge response from the UAS side
during
a registration.
I wanted to
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 08:31, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> Sreekanth writes:
> > I am going through the SIP RFC (3261) and couldn't find anything
> specified
> > regarding the 401 Unauthorized challenge response from the UAS side
> during
> > a registration.
> >
> > I wanted to confirm whether it is
Sreekanth writes:
> I am going through the SIP RFC (3261) and couldn't find anything specified
> regarding the 401 Unauthorized challenge response from the UAS side during
> a registration.
>
> I wanted to confirm whether it is okay to add a *Require *header into this
> 401 Unauthorized message
Hi All,
I am going through the SIP RFC (3261) and couldn't find anything specified
regarding the 401 Unauthorized challenge response from the UAS side during
a registration.
I wanted to confirm whether it is okay to add a *Require *header into this
401 Unauthorized message response.
Regards
