Hi, SIP response codes for rejecting a call is a pain, each implementator does a different thing. RFC 3261 doesn't help a lot with the ambiguity of 480/486/603 codes.
In fact, when the user rejects explicitely a call (by pressing "Reject" button) some UA's generate a "480 Temporarily Unavailable" (as SJphone, Thomson S2030), others generate a "486 Busy Here" (as X-Lite, Siemens), and others a "603 Decline" (as Twinkle). Personally I don't understant why "486 User Busy" is used for rejecting a call. Also, the use of "6XX" is not good since the UAS cancels the other ringing UAS (in case of parallel forking) what it's not good in many cases. So there is a "draft" [1] suggesting the use of "441 Decline". IMHO this MUST exist in the original RFC 3261. The absence of it has generated the actuall situation in which each implementator rejects a call in a different way. So... why this draft is still a draft? draft-worley-6xx-considered-harmful http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-worley-6xx-considered-harmful-00 Thanks for any explanation. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
