Hi Check the section 17.2.3 Matching Requests to Server Transactions of RFC 3261.
If the branch parameter in the top Via header field is not present, or does not contain the magic cookie, the following procedures are used. These exist to handle backwards compatibility with RFC 2543 compliant implementations. The INVITE request matches a transaction if the Request-URI, To tag, >From tag, Call-ID, CSeq, and top Via header field match those of the INVITE request which created the transaction. In this case, the INVITE is a retransmission of the original one that created the transaction. The ACK request matches a transaction if the Request- URI, From tag, Call-ID, CSeq number (not the method), and top Via header field match those of the INVITE request which created the transaction, and the To tag of the ACK matches the To tag of the response sent by the server transaction. Matching is done based on the matching rules defined for each of those header fields. Inclusion of the tag in the To header field in the ACK matching process helps disambiguate ACK for 2xx from ACK for other responses So as per this, if the incoming BYE request does not contain branch ID, then other parameters need to be used to match the transaction and if a match is found, then the last response needs to be resent. Regards Ranjit -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of radhakrishna Sent: Friday, May 28, 2010 8:42 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Sip-implementors] [HELP] ETSI TS 102 027-2 V4.1.1 (2006-07)... Hi, We are doing conformance testing based on ETSI TS 102 027-2 V4.1.1 (2006-07) document and we are find some issue with the test case SIP_CC_TE_CR_V_021 and we desperately need your help. In the purpose section of test case SIP_CC_TE_CR_V_021 it says: "Ensure that the IUT, having already answer to a BYE request, on receipt of a BYE request, before timer J fires, including a Via header set with no branch parameter but with the Request-URI, To tag, From tag, Call-ID and CSeq identical as in the first BYE request, repeats its last response." We think when the BYE is retransmitted without branch id parameter in VIA, it should be considered as new request, so how can IUT consider it as retransmitted request and repeat the last response? Regards, RadhaKrishna ************************************************************************ **** *********** This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! _______________________________________________ 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
