________________________________________
From: [email protected] 
[[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nitin Kapoor 
[[email protected]]

I have one call scenario where my termination is sending the SDP in 183 as
well as in 200 OK also. As far as i know if we are getting SDP in 183
session progress then my UAC can ignore the SDP in 200 OK. Also most of the
time SDP is same.

But here i noticed the slight difference of "Session Version". Here when my
termination is sending 188 Session Progress with SDP is sending the SDP as
below.

I can see that  my Termination is incrementing  "*Session Version*" for SDP
in 183 & 200 OK in same dialog..
_______________________________________________

(It would help if you gave the actual SDP rather than the SDP as decoded by 
some unknown program.)

If the 183 and the 200 have different to-tags, then they are within different 
dialogs, and there is no constraint on the relationship between them.

If the 183 and the 200 have the same to-tag, and the 183 is sent with PRACK, 
then the 183 finishes the offer/answer negotiation, and the 200 is allowed to 
be part of a new offer/answer negotiation.  But the details of that are 
complicated, so you should consult RFCs 3264, 3262, 4317, and 
draft-ietf-sipping-sip-offeranswer.

If the 183 and the 200 have the same to-tag, and the 183 is not sent with 
PRACK, then the two are required to have the same SDP (and the recipient is 
required to ignore the SDP in the 200 (assuming it receives the 183 first)).  
If the UAC is changing the SDP o= line, then the two SDPs are not the same, and 
it is in error.  This is specified in RFC 3264.

Dale


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

Reply via email to