Thanks Aditya,
Consider the call flow below:
A B C
INV
| -------------> | INV |
| 100 | -------------> |
| <------------- | 100 |
| | <------------- |
| | |
| | CANCEL |
| | -------------> |
| | |
| | 200 OK |
| | <------------- |
| | |
| | 487 |
| | <------------- |
| | |
| | ACK |
| | -------------> |
| 487 | |
| <------------- | |
| | |
| ACK | |
| -------------> | |
It is not required to have a CANCEL before sending a 487 response for
the call leg A-B. In this case, is it mandatory that a 487 response
contains a to-tag?
Regards,
Sunil
________________________________
From: Aditya Kumar padhy (WT01 - Technology, Media and Telecom)
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 6:42 PM
To: Sunil Bhagat (WT01 - Telecom Equipment); [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Sip] Is To-tag in non 2xx response mandatory
Hi All,
487 response will be generated only when a CANCEL will be generated for
a pending INVITE message. CANCEL request has all the information, like
which request with all mandatory header field. A cancel will be
generated from a proxy otherwise same UA which has generated invite. 487
will be responded by the other party. So its not at all require to have
To tag in non 2xx responces for invite.
Please comment.
Thanks
Aditya
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 11/13/2008 6:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Sip] Is To-tag in non 2xx response mandatory
Hi,
Should a to-tag be added to a 487 response to an initial INVITE? Even if
180 Ringing has not been sent?
Regards,
Sunil
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
