It really depends on your implementation. If you are taking care media and SDP processing and Leg 1 of the B2BUA already sent a 200 Ok response to the INVITE before sending the second leg INVITE out, then it makes sense to send a BYE. However, if you do not process SDP and you let the SDP pass through to the far end UAS, then synchronizing your leg1 and leg2 would be more appropriate. There is no RFC defining a B2BUA. As long as each of the two legs composing the B2B UA connection complies with RFC 3261, then you can pretty much do whatever you like.
If you need a reference, an implementation of a B2BUA is available at http://www.opensipstack.org. Joegen Rishabh Garg wrote: > Ours is a B2BUA. Currently if we are receiving the 4xx response (for eg. 486 > Busy Here) from the terminating called party,then after ACKing the same we > are sending the BYE to originating calling party and dropping the connection > instead of proxying the 486 response to originating. Is it correct way of > doing it? Are B2BUA supposed to proxy error responses? Any RFC specifying the > behaviour of B2BUA?regards,rishabh > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > Sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
