Hi steven,
If offer is not sent in 200 ok also then what should be the behavior of
UAC, whether it can establish the dialog with out offer and answer
> INVITE ( with out offer )
> UAC --------------------------------------> Cisco AS5350
>
> 100 ( with out offer since not reliable)
> UAC < -------------------------------------- Cisco AS5350
>
> 180 ( with out offer since not reliable)
> UAC < -------------------------------------- Cisco AS5350
>
> 200 ( with out offer )
> UAC < -------------------------------------- Cisco AS5350
>
> ACK ( with out answer )
> UAC -------------------------------------- > Cisco AS5350
>
>
>
> Now the dialog will be establised with out any offer and answer. Whether
> this dialog is allowed ???
> Whether RFC is telling anything about the dialog with out offer and
answer.
Regards,
Thangarajan.
Steven Egan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
na.com> To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
02/17/05 03:22 PM cc
[email protected]
Subject
Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP in 183
non reliable response
Hi Thangarajan,
The Offer is also sent in the 200 OK, so it is possible to ignore the
183, and use the SDP in the 200 OK.
Cheers,
Steven
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> Quoting from RFC 3261:
>
> 'If the INVITE does not contain a session description, the UAS is
> being asked to participate in a session, and the UAC has asked that
> the UAS provide the offer of the session. It MUST provide the offer
> in its first non-failure reliable message back to the UAC. In this
> specification, that is a 2xx response to the INVITE."
>
> so, the behavior of Cisco AS5350 is not as per the RFC 3261, since it
> should not send the offer in 183 non reliable response.
> The UAC which is receiving the offer should discard it since offer is not
> as per the RFC 3261.
>
> But the problem is Cisco AS5350 can not send the offer in 200 ok, since
it
> already sent the offer in 180, so what should be the behavior of UAC,
when
> it did not receive any offer.
>
> INVITE ( with out offer )
> UAC --------------------------------------> Cisco AS5350
>
> 100 ( with out offer since not reliable)
> UAC < -------------------------------------- Cisco AS5350
>
> 180 ( with out offer since not reliable)
> UAC < -------------------------------------- Cisco AS5350
>
> 200 ( with out offer )
> UAC < -------------------------------------- Cisco AS5350
>
> ACK ( with out answer )
> UAC -------------------------------------- > Cisco AS5350
>
>
>
> Now the dialog will be establised with out any offer and answer. Whether
> this dialog is allowed ???
> Whether RFC is telling anything about the dialog with out offer and
answer.
>
>
> Regards,
> Thangarajan.
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Steven Egan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: 16. helmikuuta 2005 11:35
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Cc: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
>>[email protected]
>>Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP in 183 non reliable response
>>
>>
>>Hi Sayan,
>>I am sending the Invite with no offer to a Cisco AS5350. It is the
>>AS5350 that is sending back the 183 with SDP (I wouldn't
>>refer to it as
>>an offer per se, as it is not a reliable response). I have
>>no control
>>over how the 183 response is constructed, so I was looking to
>>know if it
>>is allowed to contain the SDP or not. I have not found
>>anything in the
>>documentation detailing this. What we are probably going to do is
>>ignore the 183 SDP and wait for the SDP in the subsequent 200.
>>Cheers,
>>Steven
>>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>Bit confused, but how does this help?
>>>As I understand the answer for the offer in the 18x (identical SDP
>>>repeated in the 200), will be answered only in the ACK to
>>
>>the 200 OK.
>>
>>>So what's the point in doing an "early offer" in an 18x, as
>>
>>the offer
>>
>>>answer can only be completed when the 200 OK/ACK exchange
>>
>>takes place.
>>
>>>Does sending an offer in 18x helps in any specific call flow?
>>>Just curious...
>>>
>>>Regards ,
>>>Sayan
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
>>
>>Of Christer
>>
>>>Holmberg (JO/LMF)
>>>Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 4:11 AM
>>>To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; Bala Neelakantan
>>>Cc: [email protected]
>>>Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] SDP in 183 non reliable response
>>>
>>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>To my understanding the same SDP shall be sent in all subsequent
>>>provisional responses - no matter if they are sent reliably
>>
>>or not. You
>>
>>>can only have at most one offer/answer exchange per SIP
>>
>>transaction, so
>>
>>>once you've sent an offer (or answer, if the INVITE did contain an
>>>offer) in 18x you can't send any more within that transaction.
>>>
>>>When it comes to forking, each dialog is handled completely separate
>>>from each other, ie the offer/answer "state" on one dialog is not
>>>affected by other dialog. How the UAC then chooses which dialogs to
>>>accept/reject, and how to handle possible media received
>>
>>from multiple
>>
>>>UASs, is an implementation issue.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Christer Holmberg
>>>Ericsson Finland
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Paul
>>>>Kyzivat
>>>>Sent: 15. helmikuuta 2005 18:42
>>>>To: Bala Neelakantan
>>>>Cc: [email protected]
>>>>Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP in 183 non reliable response
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Bala Neelakantan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Paul,
>>>>>
>>>>>I agree that the same SDP should be sent in the subsequent
>>>>
>>>>non-reliable
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>response and also on the first Reliable response.
>>>>
>>>>I guess you are shifting from the subject of the original
>>>>question, and
>>>>discussing a "normal" invite that includes an offer.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>What if the call is forked? In that case, there could be multiple
>>>>>provisional responses, each could be potentially different?
>>>>
>>>>How does the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>UAC handle those?
>>>>
>>>>This has been well documented and discussed, though it can
>>>>get complex.
>>>>
>>>>The response to each fork creates a separate dialog. It is up
>>>>to the UAC
>>>>to keep the different dialogs straight until one is answered and the
>>>>others are cancelled.
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>Neel
>>>>>
>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
>>>>
>>>>Of Paul Kyzivat
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 9:48 AM
>>>>>To: Steven Egan
>>>>>Cc: [email protected]
>>>>>Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP in 183 non reliable response
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, I went back and read to refresh my memory. I agree
>>>>
>>>>that there is
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>nothing that suggests SDP might be in an unreliable
>>>>
>>>>provisional when
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>there had been no offer in the initial request.
>>>>>
>>>>>If it *was* there, you wouldn't be able to consider it a
>>>>
>>>>true offer,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>since that must be in a reliable request or response. It
>>>>
>>>>would have to
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>be a hint of the offer to come. I don't find any language that
>>>>>explicitly *prohibits* this. But in the absence of anything
>>>>
>>>>suggesting
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>it might be valid you would be best to not count on it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>>Steven Egan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Paul,
>>>>>>So you are saying that when an INVITE is sent with no
>>>>
>>>>offer, a 183 with
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>SDP can be sent in response?
>>>>>>Can you point me to where exactly this is documented please, as my
>>>>>>problem is I cannot find anything in RFC 3261 or any other
>>>>
>>>>documentation
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>to confirm expected behaviour for the 183?
>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>Steven
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Steven Egan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>>>Is it valid to include the SDP in a non reliable 183 sent
>>>>
>>>>in response
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>to an Invite with no initial offer?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>It is ok to include the SDP in the 183 when the Invite
>>>>
>>>>contains the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>initial offer, but RFC 3261 is not clear as to whether
>>>>
>>>>the SDP can be
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>included when no offer is included in the initial invite.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I believe the answer is YES. The *same* SDP should be sent in the
>>>>>>>first reliable response.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>Sip-implementors mailing list
>>>>>[email protected]
>>>>>http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Sip-implementors mailing list
>>>>[email protected]
>>>>http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
>>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Sip-implementors mailing list
>>>[email protected]
>>>http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Confidentiality Notice
>>>
>>>The information contained in this electronic message and
>>
>>any attachments to this message are intended
>>
>>>for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain
>>
>>confidential or privileged information. If
>>
>>>you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
>>
>>sender at Wipro or [EMAIL PROTECTED] immediately
>>
>>>and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Sip-implementors mailing list
>>>[email protected]
>>>http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
>>
>>--
>>* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
>>* WWW : www.aepona.com *
>>* Phone: +44 (0)28 9026 9106 *
>>* Fax : +44 (0)28 9026 9111 *
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
>
>
>
> *********************** HSS-Private ***********************
> "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Hughes Software Systems
Limited
> (HSS) and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
> addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and
> should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it
is
> intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
> originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering,
or
> disclosing the contents of this message. HSS accepts no responsibility
for
> loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by
this
> email including damage from virus."
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
--
* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* WWW : www.aepona.com *
* Phone: +44 (0)28 9026 9106 *
* Fax : +44 (0)28 9026 9111 *
*********************** HSS-Private ***********************
"DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Hughes Software Systems Limited
(HSS) and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and
should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is
intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the
originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or
disclosing the contents of this message. HSS accepts no responsibility for
loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this
email including damage from virus."
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
