Re: [Sip-implementors] Handling of message cross over between 200OK(INVITE) and 200OK(PRACK)

Dinoop writes: >UAC B2BUA UaB > | 1:INVITE(SDP) || > +--->|| > | 2:100[INV] || > |<---+

Re: [Sip-implementors] Handling of message cross over between 200OK(INVITE) and 200OK(PRACK)

Thanks Worley and Paul, My scenario is, UAC B2BUA UaB | 1:INVITE(SDP) || +--->|| | 2:100[INV] || |<---+

Re: [Sip-implementors] Handling of message cross over between 200OK(INVITE) and 200OK(PRACK)

Dinoop, On 5/26/17 4:50 AM, Dinoop wrote: Thanks Worley and Paul, My scenario is, UAC B2BUA UaB | 1:INVITE(SDP) || +--->|| | 2:100[INV] |

Re: [Sip-implementors] Handling of message cross over between 200OK(INVITE) and 200OK(PRACK)

Dinoop writes: > How can a B2BUA handle message crossing of 200OK(invite) over 200OK(PRACK)? > Is it a correct approach for the implementation to reject the > 200OK(INVITE) until it receives PRACK response? > > I have gone through the RFC 6337, unfortunately nothing is

Re: [Sip-implementors] Handling of message cross over between 200OK(INVITE) and 200OK(PRACK)

On 5/24/17 2:53 AM, Dinoop wrote: Hi, How can a B2BUA handle message crossing of 200OK(invite) over 200OK(PRACK)? Is it a correct approach for the implementation to reject the 200OK(INVITE) until it receives PRACK response? I have gone through the RFC 6337, unfortunately nothing is mentioned

[Sip-implementors] Handling of message cross over between 200OK(INVITE) and 200OK(PRACK)

Hi, How can a B2BUA handle message crossing of 200OK(invite) over 200OK(PRACK)? Is it a correct approach for the implementation to reject the 200OK(INVITE) until it receives PRACK response? I have gone through the RFC 6337, unfortunately nothing is mentioned about this scenario. -- Thanks &