gt;
> Best Regards
>
> Attila
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jaiswal, Sanjiv (NSN - IN/Bangalore)
> [mailto:sanjiv.jais...@nsn.com]
> Sent: Fri 11/03/2011 09:20
> To: ext ashok kumar; Attila Sipos
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Nitin K
t; The UAC MUST treat the first session
> > description it receives as the answer, and MUST ignore any
> > session descriptions in subsequent responses to the initial
> > INVITE.
> >
> > So if it receives the 18x with SDP as an answer then it MUST i
l, Sanjiv (NSN - IN/Bangalore) [mailto:sanjiv.jais...@nsn.com]
Sent: Fri 11/03/2011 10:07
To: Attila Sipos; ext ashok kumar
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Nitin Kapoor
Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 & 200 OK
Hi Attila,
Take for example
nal Message-
> From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> [mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of ext
> ashok kumar
> Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 1:58 PM
> To: Attila Sipos
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Nitin Kapoor
> Subject: Re: [Sip-i
: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Nitin Kapoor
Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 &
200 OK
Hi Sanjiv,
The behaviour you describe is not permitted.
As Bob Penfield correctly said:
There can be only one offer/answer in a single INVITE transaction. The
ashok kumar; Attila Sipos
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Nitin Kapoor
Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 & 200 OK
Hi Ashok,
The SDP from 183 is considered as Answer of initial offer.
Different SDP in 200 OK is considered as new offer and then i
...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of ext
ashok kumar
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 1:58 PM
To: Attila Sipos
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Nitin Kapoor
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 &
200 OK
Hi At
Sent: Fri 11/03/2011 08:28
To: Attila Sipos
Cc: Nitin Kapoor; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 & 200 OK
Hi Attila,
Agree with you but what happens when 183 and 200 OK have different SDPs from
the terminating endpoint. T
un...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of
> ashok kumar
> Sent: 09 March 2011 13:19
> To: Nitin Kapoor
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 &
> 200 OK
>
> Hi Nitin,
>
> I did not get to kn
From: Worley, Dale R (Dale)
If the 183 and the 200 have the same to-tag, and the 183 is sent with PRACK,
then the 183 finishes the offer/answer negotiation, and the 200 is allowed to
be part of a new offer/answer negotiation. But the details of that are
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Nitin Kapoor
[nitinkapo...@gmail.com]
I have one call scenario where my termination is sending the SDP in 183 as
well as in 200 OK also. As
maart 2011 8:25
> To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Cc: s...@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 & 200
> OK - Email found in subject
>
>
> Hello All,
>
> Could any one please help me out on requested query as below.
Session Version in 183 & 200 OK
There is a draft which tries to clarify what is legal.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sipping-sip-offeranswer-13
OfferAnswer RFCIni Est E
-Original Message-
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of
ashok kumar
Sent: 09 March 2011 13:19
To: Nitin Kapoor
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session
Hi Nitin,
I did not get to know the complete call flow which you are trying to do.
However, there could be two possibilities:
1> 183 Session Progress is reliable provisional response (PRACK procedure)
If this is the case then the 200 OK from the termination contains the new
offer in your case bec
.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 &
200 OK
On 03/08/2011 03:48 PM, Nitin Kapoor wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I have one call scenario where my termination is sending the SDP in
> 183 as well as in 200 OK also. As far as i know if we are getting SDP
2011 8:25
To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Cc: s...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 & 200 OK -
Email found in subject
Hello All,
Could any one please help me out on requested query as below.
Thanks,
Nitin
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:48 PM
Hello All,
Could any one please help me out on requested query as below.
Thanks,
Nitin
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Nitin Kapoor wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I have one call scenario where my termination is sending the SDP in 183 as
> well as in 200 OK also. As far as i know if we are getting SDP
On 03/08/2011 03:48 PM, Nitin Kapoor wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I have one call scenario where my termination is sending the SDP in 183 as
> well as in 200 OK also. As far as i know if we are getting SDP in 183
> session progress then my UAC can ignore the SDP in 200 OK. Also most of the
> time SDP is
Dear All,
I have one call scenario where my termination is sending the SDP in 183 as
well as in 200 OK also. As far as i know if we are getting SDP in 183
session progress then my UAC can ignore the SDP in 200 OK. Also most of the
time SDP is same.
But here i noticed the slight difference of "Ses
20 matches
Mail list logo
