> We suspect that the re-INVITE is what's causing the 480. <snip>
> This scenario does not seem clear in RFC 4028. can someone > please clarify and provide proof? Concerning returning 480 to mid-dialog requests such as re-INVITE, RFC 5057 indicates that RFC 3261 is unclear about what it means. You might want to ask the vendor why they are returning 480; they might not like how RFC 5057 indicates to handle it. Concerning RFC 4028, the session expiration stuff is negotiated again with every re-INVITE and UPDATE. For instance, section 7.1 indicates the following. "The UAC MAY include the refresher parameter with value 'uac' if it wants to perform the refreshes. However, it is RECOMMENDED that the parameter be omitted so that it can be selected by the negotiation mechanisms described below." _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
