Re: [reSIProcate-users] Compatability with RFC2543 clients
Andrew:
I'm not sure how much work we're willing to do in the stack core to
accommodate 2543 clients. Even the IETF has moved on such that
significant new protocol extensions abandon backwards compatibility. My
inclination would be to leave this particular resip behavior unchanged
-- in fact, it's not clear to me that we even could fix it without
violating the request-forwarding rules in draft-sparks-sip-invfix-02.
If you have a CCO account, you can follow the instructions here to
upgrade your ATA to a somewhat less ancient version of firmware, which
should solve your problem:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cata/186_188/2_15/english/administration/guide/sip/SIP88APC.html
If you don't have a CCO account... post back to this list and see if
someone speaks up to help you out. ;-)
/a
P.S. Here's the technical explanation of what's going on: it looks like
this used to work until about SVN revision 6545 (August 2006) -- it may
have broken somewhat earlier than that, but it's hard to tell. The code
in SipMessage.cxx:374 has comments indicating that returning an empty
cid should cause the stack to simply forward a response (presumably
according to its via header field) -- but the code that calls it from
TransactionState.cxx:168 unceremoniously discards the message instead.
(At least, I think that's the code path you're exercising -- turning
debugging up to DEBUG for the stack would confirm).
Andrew Wood wrote:
Im trying to build a stric routing proxy using resip.
Ive got it working with 2 Cisco IP phones fine, but Ive also got some
old Cisco ATA186 which I dont think are RFC3261 compliant.
Whenever one of these is involved in the call strange things happen.
www.simple.org/notworking.html <http://www.simple.org/notworking.html>
shows a sample message exchange between an ATA 186 (202@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:202@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>) calling a Cisco IP phone
(200@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:200@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>) via the resip based
proxy at 192.168.254.254.
The called phone rings but the 180 appears to be disliked by
resiprocate when its forwarded on.
I suspect Im doing something wrong with the forwarding of either the
INVITE or the 180 but for a call between two Cisco IP phones it works
fine.
Any ideas please
Regards
Andrew
Recommends you try OpenOffice.org - I'm
Microsoft free, you too can be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
resiprocate-users mailing list
resiprocate-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List Archive: http://list.resiprocate.org/archive/resiprocate-users/