Hi There was no provisional response to the ReINVITE, simple case of the UAS (Nortel switch) misbehaving. No other signalling.
Regards Tarun Gupta On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 9:42 pm, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: On 12/5/14 7:47 AM, ankur bansal wrote: > Hi > Reinvite acting as session modification request here so its behavior > should be atomic. > And reinvite failed in the end reason could be any error response or > offer answer failure.but uac should try to restore session state sending > update request to get session back in sync as recommended in rfc 6337 > section 3.4.as <http://3.4.as> In the case of reINVITE failure with rollback, both ends know that there has been a failure, and so both can rollback to the same state. In this case the UAC believes there has been a failure, but the UAS thinks (mistakenly) that there has been success. So the UAS won't be rolling back - it will retain whatever that it thinks it should now be in. That is a formula for failure. Certainly the UAC *could* try to recover the session by sending another reINVITE. But at this point should it have any confidence in how that will turn out? >i believe you didnt get any media failure > for session parameters established with pre reinvite .if there is media > failure then bye can be sent. BYE can be sent for any reason! > Also would like to understand what made uas to send 200ok no sdp.is > <http://sdp.is> it just misbehaviour or uas sent any 183sdp before.plz > share full call flow to understand uas behaviour in better way Yes - if there is more to the call flow then we need to see it all to really understand. Thanks, Paul > On Dec 4, 2014 10:45 PM, "Paul Kyzivat" <pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu > <mailto:pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu>> wrote: > > On 12/4/14 2:20 AM, Tarun2 Gupta wrote: > > Hi > > Our implementation is clearing the call on receiving no SDP > (answer) in 200 OK for a ReINVITE with SDP (offer) sent. Is this > (call clearing) the recommended behavior? > I am not able to find any normative RFC references to support > this. Can you please help here? > > > Is this a typical simple reINVITE: > > -> reINVITE w/SDP (offer) > <- 200 OK without SDP > > Or were there some other messages involved? > > I agree that if the above is the case, then you are in an > inconsistent state relative to the other UA and it is probably hard > to continue the call. > > Thanks, > Paul > > _________________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > sip-implement...@lists.cs.__columbia.edu > <mailto:Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/__mailman/listinfo/sip-__implementors > <https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors> > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus." _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
