Thanks Frank,

But in this case, the call is matured and hence charged.

Also, if there is a need of some message like NACK which can be sent instead 
of ACK in SIP.

Regards
Sarju
# 9810304396
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Frank Shearar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "SIP Implementors (E-mail)" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 3:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Query Regarding Handling of Bad 200 
Okmessage


> Wouldn't it be better to send the ACK (the 200 OK is well-formed from the
> SIP perspective), and then BYE the call immediately, with some appropriate
> explanation (like, say, a Warning header)? As Sarju Garg says elsewhere, 
> the
> callee's just going to keep resending that 200 OK until it times out
> (typically in what? 64 seconds?).
>
> frank
>
> "Uttam Kumar Sarkar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> If 200 OK of INVITE is bad, then you may choose not to send ACK.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sarju
>> Garg
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 1:02 AM
>> To: SIP Implementors (E-mail)
>> Subject: [Sip-implementors] Query Regarding Handling of Bad 200 Ok
>> message
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would request someone to let me know what should be the handling in
>> case UAC receives a bad 200 Ok message. For example, in case SDP format
>> is not ok.
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> Regards
>> Sarju
>> # 9810304396
>>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>>   From: Rayees Khan
>>   To: Stephen Paterson
>>   Cc: SIP Implementors (E-mail)
>>   Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 11:57 PM
>>   Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Session timer - how to indicate the
>> session hasnot changed
>>
>>
>>
>>   Hi Stephen,
>>
>>   This is a protocol violation, however, the handling of such things is
>> highly local to the Endpoint. An EP can choose to just check the o-line
>> and decide on the basis of this whether to process rest of SDP or not.
>>
>>
>>   regards
>>   Rayees
>>
>>
>>
>>   [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -----
>>
>>
>>     To: "SIP Implementors (E-mail)" <[email protected]>
>>     From: Stephen Paterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>     Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>     Date: 06/12/2006 11:31AM
>>     Subject: [Sip-implementors] Session timer - how to indicate the
>> session hasnot changed
>>
>>     Hi all,
>>
>>     The last paragraph of section 7.4 of RFC 4028 states:
>>
>>     'It is RECOMMENDED that the UPDATE request not contain an offer [4],
>> but a
>>     re-INVITE SHOULD contain one, even if the details of the session
>> have not
>>     changed. In that case, the offer MUST indicate that it has not
>> changed. In
>>     the case of SDP, this is accomplished by including the same value
>> for the
>>     origin field as did previous SDP messages to its peer. The same is
>> true for
>>     an answer exchanged as a result of a session refresh request; if it
>> has not
>>     changed, that MUST be indicated.'
>>
>>     What happens when the refresher sends an offer with an unchanged
>> origin
>>     field, receives a 200 OK with an unchanged origin field but an 'm='
>> line
>>     that was present in the most recent offer/answer exchange is missing
>> from
>>     the UAS response?
>>
>>     My gut feeling is that the UAS is out of spec (and the entire SDP
>> should be
>>     unchanged) but according to the quote above, only the origin field
>> needs to
>>     be unchanged in order to indicate that the session details are also
>>     unchanged.
>>
>>     At the moment this causes problem for our SIP implementation as it
>> has no
>>     control over the media. It simply raises an event to the application
>> that is
>>     controlling the media to indicate that the session parameters have
>> changed.
>>     We don't want to be doing this for session refresh requests unless a
>> genuine
>>     offer/answer exchange has been negotiated during the transaction.
>>
>>     If the UAS is out of spec, how should the UAC behave?
>>     If not, is there anywhere in the RFCs that specifies more clearly
>> how to
>>     identify that a media session is unchanged? I haven't been able to
>> find
>>     anything in SIP, SDP, Session Timer or Offer Answer (which isn't to
>> say the
>>     answers aren't there somewhere).
>>
>>     It may well be the case that I just have to change our logic and
>> ignore all
>>     of the SDP if the 'o=' is unchanged. Part of my query is to ensure
>> that, if
>>     I do this, I don't break anything elsewhere.
>>
>>     Cheers
>>
>>     Steve
>>
>>     Steve Paterson
>>     Software Engineer
>>     Aculab
>>     Tel: +44 (0) 1908 273866
>>     Fax: +44 (0) 1908 273801
>>     Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>     Website: http://www.aculab.com
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Sip-implementors mailing list
>>     [email protected]
>>     https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>>
>>
>>
>>   *****FSS-Private *****" DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to
>> Flextronics Software Systems Limited (FSS) and is intended solely for
>> the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain
>> privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or
>> used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have
>> received this message in error, please notify the originator
>> immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified
>> that you are strictly prohibited from using, copying, altering, or
>> disclosing the contents of this message. FSS accepts no responsibility
>> for loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted
>> by this email including damage from virus."
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------
>>
>>
>>   _______________________________________________
>>   Sip-implementors mailing list
>>   [email protected]
>>   https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sip-implementors mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sip-implementors mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> 

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to