RE: [reSIProcate] How to handle retransmission of 200 OK for anINVITE ?
The fix is to silently re-Ack the 200 re-tranmission. There are no
application callbacks for a 200 retranmission.
-----Original Message-----
From: Asheesh Joshi [mailto:asjoshi@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 9:32 PM
To: Scott Godin
Cc: 'resiprocate-devel'
Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] How to handle retransmission of 200 OK for
anINVITE ?
I was thinking on this problem. Shouldn't a UAS receiving a retransmitted
INVITE ignore the retransmission if it has already sent out a 200 OK for the
1st INVITE ? This seems to be the cause of my problem. My UAC is sending
INVITE twice as the UAS is not responding ( even with a provisional response
) to my first INVITE. Now when it sends the 200 OK for the 1st INVITE, it
receives a 2nd retransmitted INVITE and responds with 200 OK
again. Is it because it thinks that the 1st 200 OK it sent was lost ?
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Godin [mailto:slgodin@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 8:00 AM
To: 'Asheesh Joshi'; 'resiprocate-devel'
Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] How to handle retransmission of 200 OK for
anINVITE ?
Just to claify - 200 retranmissions for Invites are not handled by the
transaction layer - they should be handled by dum. : )
-----Original Message-----
From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Scott
Godin
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 9:26 PM
To: 'Asheesh Joshi'; 'resiprocate-devel'
Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] How to handle retransmission of 200 OK for
anINVITE ?
200 transmissions for Invites only are supposed to be passed to the UAC
layer and are not handled by the stack. There is stuff in 3261 about this.
Eitherway - I just submitted a bug fix for this problem earlier this week.
Can you please try using the latest SVN head?
Thanks,
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Asheesh
Joshi
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:34 PM
To: resiprocate-devel
Subject: [reSIProcate] How to handle retransmission of 200 OK for an INVITE
?
Hi,
I am facing a problem in resip. The DUM gives me a callback even for
a retransmission of 200 OK for an INVITE.
Is it that I have to take care of checking the Cseq in my application and
ignore it ? Shouldn't the Transaction layer itself Reject such a
retransmitted 200 OK and not give a callback ?
Actually I don't see this thing mentioned in the RFC 3261 either!
Is
this a bug in RFC ?
- Regards
Asheesh
-----Original Message-----
From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of maodonghu
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 6:54 AM
To: resiprocate-devel
Subject: [reSIProcate] (no subject)
Hi,
I am a fresh man on reSIProcate, now I encounter a problem in my program.
if the program written like this, it is good for work:
//---------------------------------------------------
int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
//Log::initialize(Log::Cout, Log::Stack, argv[0]);
SipStack sip_stack;
DialogUsageManager* dum = new DialogUsageManager( sip_stack );
dum->addTransport( UDP, 12345 );
but if written like this, it will throw a exception:
//----------------------------------------------------
SipStack sip_stack;
int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
//Log::initialize(Log::Cout, Log::Stack, argv[0]);
DialogUsageManager* dum = new DialogUsageManager( sip_stack );
dum->addTransport( UDP, 12345 );
...
I dont know why the sip_stack must be local ?
maodonghu
hhmmdd@xxxxxxx
2005-11-03
_______________________________________________
resiprocate-devel mailing list
resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
_______________________________________________
resiprocate-devel mailing list
resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel