> My phone has got an INVITE with the following field > > From: <sip:a...@example-1.com>1234 > To: <sip:stef...@example2.com> > > then it sends 200-INVITE as follows > From: <sip:a...@example-1.com>123444 > To: <sip:stef...@example2.com>432144
The 200 response is malformed if it was supposed to correlate to the mentioned INVITE. The From tag changed. > Then my phone is receiving ACK as > From: <sip:jkalla...@example-3.com>123444 > To: <sip:stef...@example2.com>432144 The ACK is malformed if it supposed to correspond the mentioned 200 response since the From URI changed. > should my phone accept it and stop responding 200-INVITE? Maybe. :) Malformed messages can basically be handled however the device prefers. However, RFC 3261 (section 17.1.3 and section 17.2.3) transaction matching rules concerning magic cookies is way too lenient in my opinion since it allows matching ridiculously malformed messages. For instance, it doesn't even require that the Call-ID header be correct. The device that sent the malformed 200 response should be fixed to quit sending the wrong From tag. The device that sent the malformed ACK should be fixed to quit sending the wrong From URI. RFC 3261 and RFC 4916 do not provide a mechanism use ACK to update the From's URI. -- This email is intended solely for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this email in error, please notify BroadSoft, Inc. immediately by replying to this message, and destroy all copies of this message, along with any attachment, prior to reading, distributing or copying it. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
