sip-implementors  

Messages by Thread

• • Re: [Sip-implementors] Reflection of non-registered SDP attributes Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Reflection of non-registered SDP attributes Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Reflection of non-registered SDP attributes Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] image in initial INVITE royj
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] image in initial INVITE Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] image in initial INVITE royj
• [Sip-implementors] [Call for Workshop Proposals]: 24th European Symposium on Research in Computer Security (ESORICS 2019) Publicity Chair ESORICS 2019
• [Sip-implementors] usage of Ephimeral ports Anjan Naik
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] usage of Ephimeral ports George Vagenas
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] usage of Ephimeral ports Anjan Naik
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] usage of Ephimeral ports George Vagenas
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] usage of Ephimeral ports Anjan Naik
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] usage of Ephimeral ports George Vagenas
• [Sip-implementors] Changing of PAI in reply royj
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Changing of PAI in reply OKUMURA Shinji
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Changing of PAI in reply royj
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Changing of PAI in reply roy j
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Changing of PAI in reply OKUMURA Shinji
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Changing of PAI in reply royj
• [Sip-implementors] Dynamic payload number during renegotiation. RFC 3264 Oleksandr Fadieiev
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Dynamic payload number during renegotiation. RFC 3264 Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] CFP: The 24th European Symposium on Research in Computer Security (ESORICS 2019) Publicity Chair ESORICS 2019
  • [Sip-implementors] CFP: The 24th European Symposium on Research in Computer Security (ESORICS 2019) Publicity Chair ESORICS 2019
• [Sip-implementors] ESORICS 2019 - Call for Workshop Proposals [24th European Symposium on Research in Computer Security, Luxembourg, 2019] Publicity Chair ESORICS 2019
• [Sip-implementors] Does UDP fragmentation of SIP packets violate RFC3261? Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Does UDP fragmentation of SIP packets violate RFC3261? Roman Shpount
• [Sip-implementors] RFC 4585: Negotiation of feedback mechanisms Richard Shields
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 4585: Negotiation of feedback mechanisms Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Question if we reject a re-Invite with 404, we need to send a BYE message to end a call? Moy Amiga
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question if we reject a re-Invite with 404, we need to send a BYE message to end a call? Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question if we reject a re-Invite with 404, we need to send a BYE message to end a call? Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question if we reject a re-Invite with 404, we need to send a BYE message to end a call? Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question if we reject a re-Invite with 404, we need to send a BYE message to end a call? Moy Amiga
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question if we reject a re-Invite with 404, we need to send a BYE message to end a call? Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question if we reject a re-Invite with 404, we need to send a BYE message to end a call? Moy Amiga
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question if we reject a re-Invite with 404, we need to send a BYE message to end a call? Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] Question on Offer/Answer Model with SIP Amarnath Kanchivanam
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question on Offer/Answer Model with SIP Richard Phernambucq
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question on Offer/Answer Model with SIP Olle E. Johansson
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question on Offer/Answer Model with SIP Amarnath Kanchivanam
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question on Offer/Answer Model with SIP Richard Phernambucq
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question on Offer/Answer Model with SIP Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question on Offer/Answer Model with SIP Amarnath Kanchivanam
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question on Offer/Answer Model with SIP Paul Kyzivat
• Re: [Sip-implementors] Query about Content-Type when Content-Length = 0 Hamza Mohamed Salman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Query about Content-Type when Content-Length = 0 Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Query about Content-Type when Content-Length = 0 Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Appropriate back-off response for overly frequent registrations Philipp Schöning
• [Sip-implementors] Switch not forwarding 200OK message Abhishek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Switch not forwarding 200OK message Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Switch not forwarding 200OK message Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Switch not forwarding 200OK message abhishek verma
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Switch not forwarding 200OK message ankur bansal
• [Sip-implementors] T.38 over SRTP from a 3GPP IMS Philipp Schöning
• [Sip-implementors] Avoid announcements from PSTN overlapping with SIP Server ones. Juan De Stefano
• [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Paul Heitkemper
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RTP with wrong payload Sundbaum Per-Johan (Telenor Sverige AB)
• [Sip-implementors] Is preserving payload definitions when renegotiate media session a must? Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is preserving payload definitions when renegotiate media session a must? Richard Phernambucq
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is preserving payload definitions when renegotiate media session a must? Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is preserving payload definitions when renegotiate media session a must? Richard Phernambucq
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is preserving payload definitions when renegotiate media session a must? Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is preserving payload definitions when renegotiate media session a must? Richard Phernambucq
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is preserving payload definitions when renegotiate media session a must? Philipp Schöning
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is preserving payload definitions when renegotiate media session a must? Michael
  • [Sip-implementors] Sip proxies and REST endpoints ngn
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Sip proxies and REST endpoints Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Sip proxies and REST endpoints ngn
• [Sip-implementors] Volte Call voip tester
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Volte Call Arun Tagare
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Volte Call ankur bansal
• [Sip-implementors] Does RFC3261 support Multiple PAI or PPI headers in INVITE request Harshith Mulky
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Does RFC3261 support Multiple PAI or PPI headers in INVITE request Qter
• [Sip-implementors] t.38 port equal 0 in SDP Qter
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] t.38 port equal 0 in SDP Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] t.38 port equal 0 in SDP swaminathan.seethara...@wipro.com
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] t.38 port equal 0 in SDP Qter
• [Sip-implementors] REFER received before ACK, What should be done !! Karthik Sasupalli
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] REFER received before ACK, What should be done !! Roman Shpount
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] REFER received before ACK, What should be done !! Karthik Sasupalli
• [Sip-implementors] REFER received before ACK, What to do!! karthik sasupalli
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] REFER received before ACK, What to do!! Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] REFER received before ACK, What to do!! Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] REFER received before ACK, What to do!! karthik sasupalli
• [Sip-implementors] MSRP SEND's CPIM From header - display name in URI Nancy Greene
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] MSRP SEND's CPIM From header - display name in URI Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] 401 Unauthorized with Require Header? Sreekanth
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 401 Unauthorized with Require Header? Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 401 Unauthorized with Require Header? Sreekanth
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 401 Unauthorized with Require Header? Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 401 Unauthorized with Require Header? Olle E. Johansson
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 401 Unauthorized with Require Header? Sreekanth
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 401 Unauthorized with Require Header? Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Routing for BYE Vs Other messages Prasanth Sylvester
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Routing for BYE Vs Other messages Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Interpreting the P-Early-Media header from UAC Dinoop
• [Sip-implementors] Number Translation using Voice Rolando Sanchez Espada
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Number Translation using Voice jrbress
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Number Translation using Voice Rolando Sanchez Espada
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Number Translation using Voice Aman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Number Translation using Voice Rolando Sanchez Espada
• [Sip-implementors] Offer/answer model in early media with forking Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/answer model in early media with forking Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/answer model in early media with forking Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/answer model in early media with forking Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/answer model in early media with forking Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/answer model in early media with forking Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/answer model in early media with forking Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer/answer model in early media with forking Alex Balashov
• [Sip-implementors] RFC 6337, Section 5.3. Hold and Resume of Media Parveen Aggarwal
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 6337, Section 5.3. Hold and Resume of Media Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 6337, Section 5.3. Hold and Resume of Media Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] SIP 422 and RFC 4028 Aman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP 422 and RFC 4028 Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP 422 and RFC 4028 Aman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP 422 and RFC 4028 Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP 422 and RFC 4028 Aman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP 422 and RFC 4028 Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP 422 and RFC 4028 Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP 422 and RFC 4028 Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] Media Port change during Hold/resume Parveen Aggarwal
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Media Port change during Hold/resume venkat ramana
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Media Port change during Hold/resume Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Media Port change during Hold/resume Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Media Port change during Hold/resume swaminathan.seethara...@wipro.com
• [Sip-implementors] Call failure after ReInvite Abhishek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Call failure after ReInvite Arun Tagare
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Call failure after ReInvite Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Call failure after ReInvite Abhishek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Call failure after ReInvite Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Call failure after ReInvite venkat ramana
• [Sip-implementors] NETFILTER SIP CONNTRACK and RFC-6157 section 4.1 non-compliance indresh singh
• [Sip-implementors] Registration Question Mike Coffee
• [Sip-implementors] Adding user=phone to Request-URI when using GRUU Richard Phernambucq
• [Sip-implementors] To tag in 407 challenges Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] To tag in 407 challenges Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] To tag in 407 challenges Alex Balashov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] To tag in 407 challenges Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] 2 mline in the SDP Request in SRTP negotiation Zuñiga , Guillermo
• [Sip-implementors] DTMF Event and coded audio packets F Yuan
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] DTMF Event and coded audio packets Anh Cao
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] DTMF Event and coded audio packets F Yuan
• [Sip-implementors] Codec Negotiation issue Rakesh
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Codec Negotiation issue Asim Sulaiman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Codec Negotiation issue Rakesh
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Codec Negotiation issue Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Codec Negotiation issue Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] is Contact Header Mandatory and could be anonymous in the INVITE Zuñiga , Guillermo
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] is Contact Header Mandatory and could be anonymous in the INVITE Aman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] is Contact Header Mandatory and could be anonymous in the INVITE Zuñiga , Guillermo
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] is Contact Header Mandatory and could be anonymous in the INVITE anhright
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] is Contact Header Mandatory and could be anonymous in the INVITE Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] is Contact Header Mandatory and could be anonymous in the INVITE Arun Tagare
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] is Contact Header Mandatory and could be anonymous in the INVITE Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Question regarding sip authentication and 401 challenge response at UE side Arun Tagare
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question regarding sip authentication and 401 challenge response at UE side Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Nested application/Resource-lists Abhishek Jain
• [Sip-implementors] Announcement not heard during early media Mayank Gupta
  • [Sip-implementors] Announcement not heard during early media Mayank Gupta
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Announcement not heard during early media Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] re-Invite after 488 Alexey
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] re-Invite after 488 Ren Xin
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] re-Invite after 488 Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] re-Invite after 488 Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Diameter Details voip tester
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Diameter Details Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] authentication-info: nextnounce Jing Jiang
• [Sip-implementors] Different TO Tag in SIP Bye as compare to SIP 200 OK NK
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Different TO Tag in SIP Bye as compare to SIP 200 OK Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] presence state and/or blf Rolando Sanchez Espada
• [Sip-implementors] Regarding SSRC and Seq in RTP Roland Nyberg
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Regarding SSRC and Seq in RTP Maxim Sobolev
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Regarding SSRC and Seq in RTP Roland Nyberg
• [Sip-implementors] Changing <unicast-address> in "o=" field wisniawy

• Earlier messages
• Later messages