Hello All,

Thanks for the reply.

Here is another problem i observed into the "m" line, but not sure whether
this is the issue or not.

I noticed the wild space after "101" into the m line.

m=audio 6300 RTP/AVP 18 0 8 35 36 2 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 4 80 3 56
118 *101  *

Could anyone please let me know whether this correct or not to have the wild
space.

Thanks,
Nitin Kapoor

On 2 August 2010 19:40, WORLEY, Dale R (Dale) <[email protected]> wrote:

> ________________________________________
> From: [email protected] [
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Nitin Kapoor
> [[email protected]]
>
> I am facing the issue with my SBC, where my source is sending me the
> complete list of RTP payload and my SBC is returning back 488 Not
> Acceptable
> here.
>
> v=0
> o=BroadWorks 148094714 1 IN IP4 209.58.101.249
> s=-
> c=IN IP4 195.189.150.38
> t=0 0
> m=audio 6300 RTP/AVP 18 0 8 35 36 2 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 4 80 3 56
> 118 101
> a=rtpmap:118 G729B/8000/1
> a=fmtp:118 annexb=yes
> a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
> a=fmtp:101 0-15
> a=rtpmap:120 no-op/8000
>
> Now when i checked the IANA RTP payload list, and observed that most of
> them
> are still unassigned. Could anyone please check the above SDP and
> payload...and please help me whether it is correct to send 488 to
> source...or not.
>
> And also if anything wrong in above, so please pinpoint it. I also feel
> that
> because of this CODEC packet size is increasing and causing the issue.
> _______________________________________________
>
> In principle, the other UA can respond 488 for any reason.  Ideally, there
> should be a Warning header describing what it does not like about the SDP.
>
> Only a small number of RTP payload type numbers have static assignments (0,
> 3 through 18), so all others that are named in the m= line should have
> a=rtpmap.  In this case, 35 36 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 80 56 should
> either be removed or have a=rtpmap lines provided.  It is possible that
> these ill-described payload type numbers are causing the problem, but the
> other UA should ignore them.
>
> It is unlikely that the problem is the size of the SDP description.
>
> In any case, you should inquire of your SBC documentation or technical
> support what the problem is.
>
> Dale
>
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to