Hi Nagendra, Not all proxies support/ are compliant with CPL as yet so I would like to restrict to conventional 3xx/ 4xx responses for implementing these features.
Thanks for your help anyway. Regards, Gaurav -----Original Message----- ********************** Legal Disclaimer **************************** "This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any unauthorized review, use or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply email and delete the message. Thank you." ********************************************************************** From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 11:44 AM To: Gaurav Kheterpal Cc: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Call Forwarding Queries Hi gauvav, I think RFC 3880 ("Call Processing Language (CPL):A Language for User Control of Internet Telephony Services") will be helpful for you. Regards Nagendra "Gaurav Kheterpal" <gaurav.kheterpal To @conexant.com> <[email protected]>, Sent by: <[email protected]> sip-implementors- cc [EMAIL PROTECTED] ia.edu Subject [Sip-implementors] Call Forwarding Queries 12/01/2005 11:30 AM Hi, I had some queries regarding the implementation of Call Forwarding in SIP. I would like to implement the conventional CF modes - CFU (Always), CFB (Busy), CFN (No Answer) and CFC (Calendar) on a SIP phone as on a normal PSTN phone/ PBX. 1. For CFU: Is it better to use a) The Forwarding URI as a CONTACT header in the REGISTER request itself, so that no INVITES are received on the original URI. This would make forwarding to be dependent on registration expiry so is it a good idea? b) OR respond to every INVITE request with a 302/ 301 (which one of these) with the Forwarding URI as the CONTACT header? (And with reason header as 'Forward Immediate') 2. For CFN: a) In this case, should the callee ring for duration of timer B (default = 64*500 ms = 32 sec) before we send out a response (typically a 302 again with reason as 'Forward no reply'). But in this case, most proxies will themselves generate a 408 Request Timeout on expiration of timer B? How to handle this? 3. For CF based on Calendar (particular date/ time settings), which value of reason header should be used? 4. For DND (Do Not Disturb), some implementations return a 480 while others return a 486 in response to an INVITE. Though I feel it's better to use a 480 as compared to 486 for the same, I would like a second opinion on this. I'm referring to the draft-elwell-sipping-redirection-reason-01.txt draft for REASON header. Thanks for your guidance in advance. Regards, Gaurav ********************** Legal Disclaimer **************************** "This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any unauthorized review, use or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply email and delete the message. Thank you." ********************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors *********************** FSS-Unclassified *********************** "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
