i think it depend on presentation definition of UA, if no clear definition, you may ignore handler of the reason header.
2015-05-28 9:13 GMT+08:00 NK <nitinkapo...@gmail.com>: > Dear All, > > I have a scenario where our vendor includes Q.850 in proviosnal response > (183 w/sDP) in every call scenerio, doesnt matter whether number is > invalid, busy, unlocatted. > > In other words if they want to give us busy they will send 183 w/SDP and in > that they will add "reason header" and will specify that "user-busy". like > as below (there was no annoncement). > > *IP/2.0 183 Session Progress* > Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 1.1.1.1:5060;branch=z9hG4bK07Baab30f0ac4907e59 > Record-Route: <sip:2.2.2.2:9131;transport=udp;lr> > Call-ID: 285680242_96347916@1.1.1.1 > From: <sip:7038805449@1.1.1.1:5060;cpc=ordinary>;tag=gK072fb580 > To: <sip:1234568745@2.2.2.2:5060>;tag=sbc040328yrzaa3-CC-1021 > CSeq: 17205 INVITE > Allow: INVITE,ACK,OPTIONS,BYE,CANCEL,INFO,PRACK,NOTIFY,MESSAGE,UPDATE > Contact: <sip:2.2.2.2:9131> > P-Early-Media: sendrecv > *Reason: Q.850;cause=17;text="User busy"* > Content-Length: 0 > > Can you please advise if this is the correct behavior. Is there any draft > or document is there which i can go through it? > > Regards, > Nitin Kapoor > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors > -- 模糊有利于审美,清晰则有利于合作. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
