2010/6/24 Vivek Singla :
> Thanks everyone for responding. I really appreciate it.
>
> So what I understand from the responses is this:
> 2) Since this is only registration renewal, even if it fails with 401, the
> call should not be dropped until the original registration expires.
Dale alread
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Vivek Singla
[vivsin...@yahoo.com]
1) The Registration renewal can have a new unique value for the nonce. It can
also have an empty nonce v
should not be dropped until the original registration expires.
Vivek.
From: Vikas Bansal
To: Vivek Singla
Cc: Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Sent: Thu, June 24, 2010 12:24:04 AM
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Registration renewal in the
> 1) Should the Register renewal have the empty nonce. I think it should have
> the same nonce as the INVITE.
2) Should the call be dropped after 401 for the registration renewal? I am
> thinking since the Register renewal did eventually got the 200OK, may be MTA
> should have kept the call alive.
Adding to what Dale said:
Even in 3gpp, a registration failure should not cause a deregistration.
Rather, state should be the same as if you hadn't done it at all.
So as long as you eventually get it right before the registration
succeeds you should not have a problem.
Of course, if you waited
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Vivek Singla
[vivsin...@yahoo.com]
1) Should the Register renewal have the empty nonce. I think it should have the
same nonce as the INVITE
Hi,
I have a scenario here in the lab. I was wondering if I could ask couple of
questions.
MTA P-CSCF
Register (Empty nonce) >
<401 (with nonce)
Register (nonce)>
<--
