Hi Ranjit..
I think thats what i wrote in my last mail...
Send 200 response for INFO received and forget it if you dont want to do any
processing.. (Specifically for Sarju's case as hes not interested in processing
any INFO request before the call is established and at the same time he wants to
continue with the normal call right sarju??).
Bob : What if I have sent 1xx and receives INFO which I am not interested in
processing?? I cannot send 481 right?? Is the above solution acceptable in this
case??
Rgds,
Munish
"Ranjit Avasarala" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 11/12/2001 08:57:24 PM
Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Munish Chhabra/HSS@HSS, "'Bob Penfield'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: "'Sarju Garg'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "'Christer Holmberg'"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] Use of INFO before sending ACK
Hi Munish
How can you forget the INFO request, u need to acknowledge it right?
Regards
Ranjit
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 8:31 AM
To: Bob Penfield
Cc: Sarju Garg; Christer Holmberg; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Use of INFO before sending ACK
Hi Bob..
You are right... as Christer already pointed out INFO cannot not be used
for
Overlap dialing..
I cannot think of any other scenerio in which INFO can be used before
the call
is established except for supporting services.
Then I think the only option left in Sarju's case is to send 200OK
response and
forget about the INFO request received.
What do you suggest??
Rgds,
Munish
"Bob Penfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 11/12/2001 07:27:06 PM
To: "Sarju Garg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Munish Chhabra/HSS@HSS,
"Christer
Holmberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Use of INFO before sending ACK
If you take into account the dialog rules in bis-05, and INFO can only
be
sent for an early or established dialog and it must contain a From tag
and a
To tag. If a UAS received an INFO before it sent back a 1xx or 2xx with
a To
tag, it could consider it a non-existent call-leg (a.k.a. dialog), which
according to RFC 2976 MUST be responded to with 481. 409 has been
removed
from bis, and even if it had not, I don't think "Conflict" is the
correct
response. None of the other response codes seem to fit this case.
cheers,
(-:bob
Robert F. Penfield
Chief Software Architect
Acme Packet, Inc.
130 New Boston Street
Woburn, MA 01801
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sarju Garg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Christer Holmberg"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 4:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Use of INFO before sending ACK
> Hi Munish,
>
> Can i send 409 in this case? I do not expect INFO during call
establishment
> phase and hence 409.
>
> sarju
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Christer Holmberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Sarju Garg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 3:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Use of INFO before sending ACK
>
>
> >
> >
> > Hi Christer..
> > Another call scenerio in which INFO can be used before the call is
> established
> > is..
> > For a Gateway - Gateway call
> > Overlap dialing from ISUP(ETSI) - SIP(T) , INFO message might
contain
> > embedded(tunneled) "SAM" message (more digits), which needs to be
> transmitted
> > just after sending INVITE. This might happen even before it has
received
> 18x.
> > Sarju,
> > I think in your kind of scenerio, you can send response to INFO
method
and
> just
> > ignore it (because all three options listed below might lead to call
> failure
> > incase INFO retransmission times out).
> >
> > Rgds,
> > Munish
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Christer Holmberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 11/12/2001
> 02:44:40 PM
> >
> > To: Sarju Garg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bcc: Munish Chhabra/HSS)
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Use of INFO before sending ACK
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The use of INFO for sending additional digits (if you are talking
about
> > overlap dialling) has also been discussed, and the general
understanding
> > then was that INFO should NOT be used for that.
> >
> > It is RECOMMENDED that overlap dialling is not done in SIP in the
first
> > place, but there is a draft (draft-ietf-sip-overlap-01.txt) on it.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Christer Holmberg
> > Ericsson Finland
> >
> >
> > Sarju Garg wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for your quick response. I think this scenario is useful in
cases
> > > where all the digits are not known and the INVITE is sent.
Additional
> digits
> > > can be send in INFO message. But if I am building a UA for an end
> terminal
> > > user, then it should not receive INFO in such cases. What do you
say
in
> this
> > > case? How should I take in my UA call model?
> > >
> > > - sarju
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Christer Holmberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: Sarju Garg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 2:16 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Use of INFO before sending ACK
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > There was a discussion on this some time ago, and the general
> > > > understanding is that it IS allowed to send INFO before the UAC
has
> > > > received the 200 OK response and sent the ACK.
> > > >
> > > > However, unless the UAC has received a 18x provisional response,
with
> a
> > > > To header tag and Contact header to use in the INFO, it can NOT
assume
> > > > that proxis will handle/route an INFO in the same way as the
INVITE.
> For
> > > > this reason it may (depending on the scenario you want to use
INFO
> for)
> > > > be better if the UAS sends a 18x provisional response, instead
of
100
> > > > Trying, when it receives the INVITE, to make sure the UAC gets
the
To
> > > > tag and Contact header as soon as possible. They are also needed
if
> the
> > > > UAC wants to terminate the specific call setup leg using BYE.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Christer Holmberg
> > > > Ericsson Finland
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sarju Garg wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > If the user sends a message that is not expected during the
call
> state
> > > > > ,then how should UA behave to this message? FOr example if the
> calling
> > > > > side UA sends INFO while the call is being established (UA
sends
> > > > > INVITE and then INFO without waiting to send ACK first), then
how
> the
> > > > > does called side UA interpret this INFO message. There are 3
> > > > > possibilites:
> > > > > 1. Ignore it, will be retransmitted after sometime
> > > > > 2. Save it, send 1xx message and process it after receiving
ACK
> > > > > 3. Send 409 message saying that this message is received at
wrong
> > > > > time.
> > > > >
> > > > > To me, 2 seems to be the right option. Please let me know
which
> would
> > > > > be the correct behavior.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Sarju
> > > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
