I would think '400 Bad Request' is more appropriate as it's used for any type of syntax related issues either in the msg/body.. '488' need not mean bad syntax.. infact it may used in cases where the msg was successfuly decoded.... and the response is to tell the other party.. that i cannot accept this request here.. below is an example of how it can be used.. --- This re- INVITE references the existing dialog so that the other party knows that it is to modify an existing session instead of establishing a new session. The other party sends a 200 (OK) to accept the change. The requestor responds to the 200 (OK) with an ACK. If the other party does not accept the change, he sends an error response such as 488 (Not Acceptable Here), which also receives an ACK. ----
Bhat Vimal-A21233 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Sarju, You can send "488 Not Acceptable Here" for the INVITE in this case. Regards, Vimal -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sarju Garg Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 12:41 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Sip-implementors] Query Regarding SDP Failure Hi all, Can someone pls let me know tha in case the UA receive INVITE with invalid SDP field like SDP syntax issue, unable to get correct IP address format, then pls suggest the handling that UA need to do? Should UA send 400 indicating bad request or something else? Thanks and Regards Sarju _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call rates. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
