In that case it seems more appropriate to send a 180, or am I way off base here?
-Daniel On Mar 17, 2007, at 9:29 AM, KASTURI Narayanan ((kasnaray)) wrote: > Hi , > > You can treat this as an indication that the necessary info to > route the call is availanble and Call is proceeding " > "Call Proceeding" or Progress message can be sent for H323 and for > SS7 "ACM or equivalent" message based on the national standards/ > specifications can be sent. > The backward message does not have to necessarily mean a ring-back > tone always. > > Kasturi > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:sip- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Huseyin ALTUN > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:52 AM > To: Christer Holmberg (JO/LMF); Bu, Wen Fei (Leo); Will Quan; sip- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 without SDP > > Hi, > > If the call / request is started from an H.323 GW to an SBC and > SBC is doing IWF to SIP, what will be the message is being sent to > H.323 GW if SBC receives a 183 without SDP? (It is alerting) Or If > it is a MG and doing SIP-SS7, again what will happen? I think in > both scenario, calling party will hear a fake ring back tone (which > is played locally) and then will get the tone (whatever it is) > coming with SDP. > > If there is a way to give reliable information (announcement, > special ring back tone), fake information should not be provided to > calling party? Is this right? > > Thanks, > > Huseyin > > > > Huseyin Altun > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:sip- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christer > Holmberg (JO/LMF) > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 7:43 AM > To: Bu, Wen Fei (Leo); Will Quan; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 without SDP > > > Hi, > >> 183 should always take an SDP. >> But the gateway could send a 180 first, then a 183 with SDP. > > I don't know what you mean by "should always take", but it is > allowed to send 183 without SDP (unless the offer/answer rules > requires SDP to be included). > > Regards, > > Christer > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Will >> Quan >> Sent: 2007年3月15日 14:03 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [Sip-implementors] 183 without SDP >> >> Is it acceptable for a gateway to send a 183 without SDP and then one >> second later send another with SDP?--will >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > _______________________________________________ > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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
