nk.caT: 519.786.1241
-Original Message-
From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu]
Sent: May-28-15 11:42 AM
To: Joel Gerber
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Q.850 includes in Proviosional response
On 5/28/15 10:33 AM, Joel Gerber
-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Paul
Kyzivat
Sent: May-28-15 10:29 AM
To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Q.850 includes in Proviosional response
You don't say what happens *after* they send this 183. That doesn't terminate
the dialog - ther
lf Of Paul
Kyzivat
Sent: May-28-15 10:29 AM
To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Q.850 includes in Proviosional response
You don't say what happens *after* they send this 183. That doesn't terminate
the dialog - there still must be some final res
You don't say what happens *after* they send this 183. That doesn't
terminate the dialog - there still must be some final response. Does the
final response accurately reflect the distinction between busy, invalid,
etc.?
AFAICT this doesn't violate anything, so it is *technically* valid.
But,
i think it depend on presentation definition of UA, if no clear definition,
you may ignore handler of the reason header.
2015-05-28 9:13 GMT+08:00 NK :
> Dear All,
>
> I have a scenario where our vendor includes Q.850 in proviosnal response
> (183 w/sDP) in every call scenerio, doesnt matter whe
Dear All,
I have a scenario where our vendor includes Q.850 in proviosnal response
(183 w/sDP) in every call scenerio, doesnt matter whether number is
invalid, busy, unlocatted.
In other words if they want to give us busy they will send 183 w/SDP and in
that they will add "reason header" and will
