Daniel, I believe this is because the ACK for an unknown dialog is always silently discarded by UA to avoid security issue.
Cheers, Aman On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <mico...@gmail.com > wrote: > > > On 12.04.17 21:58, Adam Frankel wrote: > > You guys are correct. I forgot that this particular application > > modifies the call signaling path to another device by updating the > > contact header. It's going to add aditional complexity to account > > for this in SIPp. I think I'll just tell my script to expect a "481" > > if I am contacting this particular device type. > > > I am curious if the the 'wrong' request URI was actually the reason for > the 481 to BYE. If the endpoint didn't like the R-URI for BYE, it should > have disliked also for ACK and then the 200ok for INVITE should have > been re-transmitted few times within the 3 seconds you wait before > sending the BYE. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla > www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda > Kamailio Advanced Training - May 22-24 (USA) - www.asipto.com > Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors