Neelakantan Balasubramanian wrote: > Looking at RFC 3261, 400 Bad request is a better response. A Reason/Warning > header can be added in the response. > > 21.4.1 400 Bad Request > The request could not be understood due to malformed syntax. The > Reason-Phrase SHOULD identify the syntax problem in more detail, for > example, "Missing Call-ID header field".
Yes, this is my best pick at the moment, however, I am little bit unsure as SDP syntax is not part of SIP RFC. Regards, -- Maksym Sobolyev Sippy Software, Inc. Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts T/F: +1-646-651-1110 Web: http://www.sippysoft.com MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: SippySoft _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
