Hello,
But this is already true for 180, the GW may never get it, as you told.
In this case, the GW does not generate ALERTING. If there is no 180 from
UAS, the UAS is not ringing, I suppose. And only if the UAS is ringing,
it makes sense to generate ALERTING at the GW. So I don't see what is
broken here?
BR,
Jari
-----Original Message-----
From: ext Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 04 September, 2008 20:05
To: Mutikainen Jari (Nokia-D-MSW/Helsinki)
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [BLISS] Alert-Info URNs
Just commenting on one thing:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello Paul,
>
> Please see inline:
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 04 September, 2008 17:15
> I don't think it is at all good to start interpreting various
> *sequences* of responses as having specific meanings. (180 and 182
> have their own meanings alone, 182/180 means something else, 180/182
> means something different. How about 180/182/180? 180/180?) Among
> other things, these responses are often sent unreliably, so they may
> not all be received.
>
> [Jari] 182 alone should be sufficient to signal the CW condition. But,
> the PSTN GW still needs to wait for 180, due the fact how CW service
> was designed in PSTN.
I don't understand what you are saying.
If the GW is *originating* the call, then it will get whatever it gets.
There is no guarantee it will *ever* get a 180. It may get a 183 and
then a 200, or a 182 and 200, or ...
Are you saying that the pstn phone, calling through a gw to a sip phone
will only get the CW ringback if the sip phone sends both 182 and then
180? If so, then I think that solution is broken.
Thanks,
Paul
_______________________________________________
BLISS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
