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

Re: [reSIProcate-users] a question about warning header


I agree - resip looks wrong here.  I will change to 399, unless someone can speak up and explain the use of 499.  : )

Thanks,
Scott

On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 10:00 PM, 吴振宇 <ssosun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The  Helper class has the follow code:
if (!warning.empty())
  {
     WarningCategory warn;
     warn.code() = 499;
     warn.hostname() = hostname;
     warn.text() = warning;
     response.header(h_Warnings).push_back(warn);
  }
I have read rfc3261 20.43,can't find the 499 .so i help to the
internet,but i also get nothing.
finally,I get a idea that if the stack is wrong.
i think the warn.code should be 399.
and the same code appear in the transactionstate class.

wait your help!!
_______________________________________________
resiprocate-users mailing list
resiprocate-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List Archive: http://list.resiprocate.org/archive/resiprocate-users/