I agree that 3261 is clear about this, and so other uses are probably
inappropriate. OTOH a UAC that gets such a response ought not to freak out.
Thanks,
Paul
Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> Hi, AFAIK there are three cases where 487 occurs:
>
> 1) The UAC sends a BYE during an early-dialog so the UAS replies a 200 OK for
> the BYE and a 487 for the INVITE.
>
> 2) The UAC sends a CANCEL during an early-dialog so the UAS replies a 200 OK
> for the BYE and a 487 for the INVITE.
>
> 3)
> 13.3.1 Processing of the INVITE
> 1. If the request is an INVITE that contains an Expires header
> field, the UAS core sets a timer for the number of seconds
> indicated in the header field value. When the timer fires, the
> invitation is considered to be expired. If the invitation
> expires before the UAS has generated a final response, a 487
> (Request Terminated) response SHOULD be generated.
>
> But I've seen 487 as the reply from some softswitches when the RURI is
> invalid
> (international destination not allowed for example).
>
> And also I've seen this 487 code as recommende reply for silent rejection
> in "draft-ietf-bliss-ach-analysis":
>
> 5.3.3. Response codes
> o Silent rejection/local. 487 could be used. This is the same
> response code that would be used if a proxy were to issue a CANCEL
> request.
>
> But RFC 3261 says clearly:
>
> 21.4.25 487 Request Terminated
> The request was terminated by a BYE or CANCEL request. This response
> is never returned for a CANCEL request itself.
>
>
> So, how valid is using 487 to decline a call?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
