2009/1/9 Paulo Pizarro <paulo.piza...@gmail.com>: > 2009/1/8 Pekka Pessi <ppe...@gmail.com> >> If I understand correctly, the problem is because spec does not >> specify whether the timer E is restarted (with T2) when entering the >> "proceeding" state or if it continues running with T1. NTA takes first >> approach and ETSI spec second? This is pretty irrelevant, a RFC4320 >> compliant server will send a preliminary response only after the >> client's timer E value has grown to T2. Looking from the code, it is >> possible just to remove the call to outgoing_set_timer() (around line >> 9038 in nta.c). > > The RFC4321 (Problems Identified Associated with the SIP' Non-INVITE > Transaction) explains the problem: > .... > The patch attached, not altered the timer E during the transition to > "Proceeding" state, > and when it fires again, the timer E is reset to T2.
> Now, the test is ok. Thanks, applied. >> > The SIP_MG_RT_I_003 item also has no passed the test. The response >> > received >> > was rejected by sofia. >> > >> > SIP/2.0 200 OK >> > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.166.190;rport;branch= >> > z9hG4bKKZHN0XU3S8Kam >> > From: <sip:2...@192.168.170.101>;tag=K778U1FKv37HN?patito=legal >> > To: <sip:2...@192.168.170.101>;tag=1?patito=legal >> > Call-ID: b4468663-5820-122c-b39d-f14e001466ff >> > CSeq: 109590090 REGISTER >> > Contact: <sip:192.168.170.101:5060;transport=UDP> >> > Content-Type: application/sdp >> > Content-Length: 0 >> > >> > TPId: SIP_MG_RT_I_003 >> > Status: Mandatory >> > Ref: RFC 3261 [1] section 19.1.1. >> > Purpose: Ensure that the IUT, having sent a REGISTER request, on receipt >> > of >> > a Success (200 OK) response >> > with an URI including a header parameter in the To and From >> > headers >> > ignores them and considers >> > to have received a Success (200 OK). >> >> The response fails syntax check. Based on the test description the >> tester should send something like this: >> >> From: <sip:2...@192.168.170.101?patito=legal>;tag=K778U1FKv37HN >> To: <sip:2...@192.168.170.101?patito=legal>;tag=1 > > I confused header parameter of the URI with parameter of the FROM/TO > header... much beer last nigth :( > I fixed the test and now, it's ok. Fine. >> > As soon as I finish testing the items related to the establishment of >> > the call to send the list. > I still testing... >> Do we get some kind of official stamp of approval for Sofia then? ;) > > You know, that's impossible to give an official certification stamp for a > software library. I can give you one signed by me... Do you think it is worth > something? :) Definitely. ;) -- Pekka.Pessi mail at nokia.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It is the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Xq1LFB _______________________________________________ Sofia-sip-devel mailing list Sofia-sip-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sofia-sip-devel
