>>>>> I??aki Baz Castillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The worst is that this requeriments doesn't only affect to the RURI but to > the "To" header. So an INVITE like this:
> INVITE sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED] SIP/2.0 > To: <sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Is replied with a "487: Request Terminated" by Nortel (also I'm 100% sure > that > 487 shouldn't be used for this purpose). > Is it ""normal""? Why the hell does a softswitch require *anything* in > the "To" URI? (except the To_tag XD). Even if you found that this wasn't correctly detected, generally it is quite normal to check and use username in h_To as something another than username in RURI. It can be used, for example, to select specific DID number across the pool assigned to the customer specified in RURI (this is used e.g. in Sipura/Linksys SPA9000 as one possible form of such DID specification). See also ISUP specs and draft-yu-tel-url: they specify special "routing number" which also can be passed, in different tradition, in RURI (while final number is passed in h_To). -- Valentin Nechayev PortaOne Inc., Software Engineer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
