People keep asking questions about what a B2BUA is supposed to do.
The answer is always the same:
There are no requirements on a B2BUA except that it must be compliant as
a UA on both sides. There are no specifications about how one side
relates to the other side.
It seems clear that people want some guidance here, but the concept of
B2BUA is too general for there to be any answers.
In order to have some meaningful specifications it is necessary to more
tightly specify the intended behavior - thus defining a subtype of
B2BUA. For instance there would be more luck in defining what an SBC
should do. And there is some work going on that. Similarly, it makes
sense to specify what a conference focus should do, and there is work on
that in XCON. If you are working on some sort of B2BUA other than one of
those, and you want help in defining its behavior, then you may need to
round up a group of people with similar interests and start some work on it.
Paul
Rishabh Garg wrote:
> Ours is a B2BUA. Currently if we are receiving the 4xx response (for eg. 486
> Busy Here) from the terminating called party,then after ACKing the same we
> are sending the BYE to originating calling party and dropping the connection
> instead of proxying the 486 response to originating. Is it correct way of
> doing it? Are B2BUA supposed to proxy error responses? Any RFC specifying the
> behaviour of B2BUA?regards,rishabh
> _______________________________________________
> 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
