Sorry, forgot to fill in the Subject field... Katsuri, do you have a reference in RFC3261 where I can find this info?
Regards, // Andreas > -----Original Message----- > From: kasturi Narayanan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 3:56 PM > To: 'Andreas Byström'; [email protected] > Cc: 'Pierre Desaulty' > Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] (no subject) > > > All Responses to Non-Invite (Subscribe Register etc) do not > have ACK. Only Invite Transaction is a three way handshake > which mandates an ACK for any response. > > Kasturi > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Andreas Byström > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 7:32 AM > To: [email protected] > Cc: 'Pierre Desaulty' > Subject: [Sip-implementors] (no subject) > > Whats the expected behavior for a AUC when receiving a 401 or 407? > > My guess was that all 4xx responses should be responded with > an ACK from the UA. But looking at the exaples of RFC3665, it > looks like a 401 does not have an ACK but 407 does require an > ACK. Is there any note about this in rfc3261, that 401 and > 407 should be treated different? Maybe it has to do wich type > of request that is submitted (in rfc3665 agian, register and > 401 has no ack, invite and 407 has an ack)? > > Regards, > // Andreas > > _______________________________ > > Andreas Byström > Software Engineer > > Teligent AB > Konsul Jonssons väg 17 > P.O. Box 213 > SE 14923 Nynäshamn > > mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > web: www.teligent.se <http://www.teligent.se/> > phone: +46 (0)8 4101 7221 > mobile: +46 (0)733 1172 21 > fax: +46 (0)8 520 193 36 > _______________________________ > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listin> fo/sip-implementors > > > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
