< Previous by Date Date Index Next by Date >
< Previous in Thread Thread Index  

Re: [reSIProcate] Resiprocate having trouble parsing this (legal)SDP


I looked over it again, and you are right.  I think what I was keying
off of was a line that says that capability descriptions can be
provided at the session level or the media level, but that does not
override the ordering requirements in 2327.

Thanks for being so much smarter than me about his stuff, Scott.  I'm
going to start running all of my questions about this stuff through
you directly before I embarass myself on the list again :).

Shaun

On 1/8/07, Scott Godin <slgodin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Actually the current Sdp library is compliant to RFC4566 as well as
RFC2327.

I didn't it too closely, but where in RFC3407 does it state that a=
lines may proceed t=?

Scott

> -----Original Message-----
> From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Shaun Dawson
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 12:55 PM
> Cc: resiprocate-devel
> Subject: Re: [reSIProcate] Resiprocate having trouble parsing this
> (legal)SDP
>
> I've done some more digging on this issued and I've discovered that
> the SDP in question is a fully compliant RFC3407 SDP.  It appears that
> the current SDP parser is limited to RFC2327 SDPs.  Is there a way
> around this limitation?  Should we consider enhancing the parser to
> support RFC3407 SDPs?
>
> thanks,
>   Shaun
>
> On 12/10/06, Scott Godin <slgodin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > It is illegal for the session level attributes (a= lines) to proceed
> the t=
> > line - the parser is probably failing when it finds a t= line after
> the a=
> > lines.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Shaun
> > Dawson
> > Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2006 7:15 PM
> > To: resiprocate-devel
> > Subject: [reSIProcate] Resiprocate having trouble parsing this
> (legal) SDP
> >
> > A remote host is sending me the following SDP in a sip message
> > (hereafter stored as SipMessage msg):
> >
> > v=0
> > o=PVG 0 0 IN IP4 189.173.77.70
> > s=-
> > c=IN IP4 189.173.77.70
> > a=sqn: 0
> > a=cdsc: 1 audio RTP/AVP 8 0 116 18 13 101
> > a=cpar: a=rtpmap:116 AAL2-G726-32/8000
> > a=cpar: a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
> > a=cpar: a=fmtp:101 0-15
> > a=cpar: a=ptime:10
> > a=cpar: a=ptime:20
> > a=cpar: a=fmtp:18 annexb=yes
> > t=0 0
> > m=audio 54098 RTP/AVP 0 101
> > a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
> > a=fmtp:101 0-15
> > a=ptime:20
> >
> >
> > But, if I do the following:
> >
> >                         body = msg.getContents()->getBodyData();
> >                         body_sdp = (char *)body.c_str();
> >
> > the variable body_sdp contains:
> >
> > v=0
> > o=PVG 0 0 IN IP4 189.173.77.70
> > s=-
> > c=IN IP4 189.173.77.70
> > t=0 0
> > a=cpar: a=rtpmap:116 AAL2-G726-32/8000
> > a=cpar: a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
> > a=cpar: a=fmtp:101 0-15
> > a=cpar: a=ptime:10
> > a=cpar: a=ptime:20
> > a=cpar: a=fmtp:18 annexb=yes
> > a=cdsc: 1 audio RTP/AVP 8 0 116 18 13 101
> > a=sqn: 0
> >
> > Note that the a= lines appear in reverse order, and everything after
> > the last one in a row in the original message is discarded.  In
> > particular, the m= line is not present, and that keeps me from
> > figuring out what the port is.  I'm not seeing any exceptions or
> > anything, but I may not be looking hard enough.
> >
> > Any idea what is going on here?
> >
> > thanks,
> >   Shaun
> > _______________________________________________
> > resiprocate-devel mailing list
> > resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel