Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-09-21 Thread Joegen Baclor
The key here is to not discuss this with the switch vendor as a call-transfer. Discuss it as changing the media stream in mid-dialog via a reinvite. I they are not forwarding the re-invite, a lot of stuffs may happen in the RTP stream that will result to a corrupted audio session. 1. SSRC

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-09-21 Thread Burden, Mike
ugues Royer Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 5:53 PM To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software Subject: Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers His first post visible here: http://forum.sipfoundry.org/index.php?t=msg&th=14230&start=0&S=5f984ee66be7b3320859480cb2bc256b

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-09-21 Thread Michael Scheidell
On 9/21/10 5:53 PM, Jean-Hugues Royer wrote: His first post visible here: http://forum.sipfoundry.org/index.php?t=msg&th=14230&start=0&S=5f984ee66be7b3320859480cb2bc256b Says: "I have an ITSP that is currently battling with a switch vendor on my behalf, because when we transfer a call from exte

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-09-21 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
His first post visible here: http://forum.sipfoundry.org/index.php?t=msg&th=14230&start=0&S=5f984ee66be7b3320859480cb2bc256b Says: "I have an ITSP that is currently battling with a switch vendor on my behalf, because when we transfer a call from extension to extension, we lose audio." And they

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-09-21 Thread Tony Graziano
He is not having an issue with audio. He is trying to use sipXbridge between the ITSP and sipx and cannot because they dont support reinvites at all. On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Jean-Hugues Royer wrote: > I forget to add that in your case, if you are loosing the audio once > re-invited (tran

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-09-21 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
I forget to add that in your case, if you are loosing the audio once re-invited (transfered from your point of view) with an ITSP it usually means that either you have router that erroneously does SIP ALG and modifies the IPs inside the re-INVITEs SDPs or that the UDP/RTP packets can not flow b

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-09-21 Thread Jean-Hugues Royer
You can not do a real call transfer with re-INVITEs. You can only connect two calls together (more precisely their RTP stream) temporarily while you maintain the SIP sessions with both calls. Regards. Burden, Mike wrote: OK, the ITSP got a response from the soft-switch vendor: We ne

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-09-21 Thread Tony Graziano
I think it is nice that they support it. Do they also support MOH from the phone and consultative AND blind transfers? They would typically want to insulate all the types of failure scenarios by letting you use a gateway/sbc that uses refer locally and inserts its own MOH that will successfully neg

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-09-21 Thread Burden, Mike
OK, the ITSP got a response from the soft-switch vendor: We need to clarify some points in order to be sure that we're on the same page. As was previously mentioned by my colleague according to our official documentation and the list of currently supported RFC (2327, 2543, 3261, 3262, 32

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-08-31 Thread Worley, Dale R (Dale)
From: sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org [sipx-users-boun...@list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of Burden, Mike [...@lynk.com] The switch vendor is pointing out that they are not getting a REFER from us. This, of course, is because sipXbridge translate

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-08-31 Thread Tony Graziano
). >> >>> >>> >>> Anyone in the Grand Rapids, MI metro area with a good resume looking for >>> an opportunity with a small company with growth potential? :) >>> >>> >>> >>> [image: cid:image001.jpg@01C85750.45790B60] >>> >

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-08-31 Thread Tony Graziano
mage: Lynk.gif]* > Lynk Systems, Inc* > > * e-mail:* m...@lynk.com > > * Phone:* 616-532-4985 > > > > > > > > > *From:* Tony Graziano [mailto:tgrazi...@myitdepartment.net] > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 31, 2010 11:37 AM > *To:* Burden, Mike > *Cc:*

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-08-31 Thread Burden, Mike
k.com> Phone: 616-532-4985 From: Tony Graziano [mailto:tgrazi...@myitdepartment.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2010 11:37 AM To: Burden, Mike Cc: sipx-users Subject: Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers I don't know of a way to do that unless you use an independent SBC instead

Re: [sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-08-31 Thread Tony Graziano
I don't know of a way to do that unless you use an independent SBC instead of sipxbridge and tell it to allow REFER for that dialplan/trunk (provider). At the same time I don't see how it would be desirable to introduce that into sipxbridge (enable/disable refer). I am assuming your ITSP is a res

[sipx-users] REFER vs INVITE for transfers

2010-08-31 Thread Burden, Mike
Good morning, I have an ITSP that is currently battling with a switch vendor on my behalf, because when we transfer a call from extension to extension, we lose audio. The switch vendor is pointing out that they are not getting a REFER from us. This, of course, is because sipXbridge translates