>>>>> Robert Sparks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SIP/2.0 200 Failed > is perfectly legal and means exactly the same thing as > SIP/2.0 200 OK > And as Scott points out below, you really don't want to say 200 when > you don't mean it.
'200 Auth failed' is common method to allow human hearable error message on real call with UAs which can't detailedly describe error (most often for ATAs). UAs will think it's registered and allow outgoing call, which will be rejected with voice description. This is likely the main need to use such crutch but this is strong needed crutch. >> That having been said, it can be a problem for the server when phones >> just keep retrying (and some do the retries obnoxiously fast) after >> failures, so switching to a different status can be done to get the >> phone to stop. A 200 response would be a very poor choice for this >> (although it would stop the retries) because it make diagnosing the >> system problem very difficult. No, it isn't if voice notification on INVITE works well. -- Valentin Nechayev PortaOne Inc., Software Engineer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
