Hi,
I wanted to ask what people think about this here (as it seems to be
buried deep down in the comment thread of the tracker):
If we are using a B2B with session timer, and we are doing the
following refresh call flow:
A SEMS B
... sst timer expires ...
| | |
|<--INVITE | |
|--- OK/SDPc------->| |
| |---INVITE / SDPc-->|
| |<-- OK/SDPd--------|
|<----ACK/SDPd------|----ACK----------->|
| | |
that works fine if it succeeds, i.e. A and B respond.
But, what should we do if B side fails ?
A SEMS B
... sst timer expires ...
| | |
|<--INVITE | |
|--- OK/SDPc------->|
| |---INVITE / SDPc-->
| |
...
| |---INVITE / SDPc--> (retrans)
...
| |
| |---INVITE / SDPc--> (retrans)
| |<- local 408
by the time INVITE on B leg times out, A is probably already thinking
that its reinvite transaction timed out, because it has not received
ACK/SDP answer.
should SEMS send ACK with the last established SDP after e.g. half the
INVITE timer? any other way to do that properly?
Stefan
-------- Original Message --------
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
======================================================================
https://bugtracker.iptel.org/view.php?id=35
======================================================================
[...]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
re 1) an empty INVITE has been sent to GW, it responded with 200 OK + SDP
offer. if everything works, we send this offer into the other leg, get the
SDP answer there, and send the SDP answer in ACK.
now, the other leg does not respond. what would be the desired behaviour
in that case? send an ACK with the last SDP after half the INVITE
transaction timer?
[...]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Stefan Sayer
VoIP Services Consulting and Development
Warschauer Str. 24
10243 Berlin
tel:+491621366449
sip:[email protected]
email/xmpp:[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Semsdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/semsdev
