sip-implementors  

Messages by Thread

• • Re: [Sip-implementors] Unknown parameter in Via/Record-Route Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Is there any free tool to test SIP-I Mayank Gupta
• [Sip-implementors] Is this valid : "m=image 30032 udptl 0" Ramesh Babu Kuppili
• [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Arun Arora
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Arun Arora
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Joel Gerber
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Arun Arora
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Joel Gerber
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Arun Arora
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Arun Arora
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Max length of To/ From headers Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Is it OK to put spaces b/w SIP and COLON in SIP URI Arun Arora
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is it OK to put spaces b/w SIP and COLON in SIP URI Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is it OK to put spaces b/w SIP and COLON in SIP URI Arun Arora
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is it OK to put spaces b/w SIP and COLON in SIP URI Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is it OK to put spaces b/w SIP and COLON in SIP URI Arun Arora
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Is it OK to put spaces b/w SIP and COLON in SIP URI Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Help: UE behaviour corresponding to different registration events received in Notify Rohit Jain
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Help: UE behaviour corresponding to different registration events received in Notify Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Help: UE behaviour corresponding to different registration events received in Notify Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Help: UE behaviour corresponding to different registration events received in Notify Talwar, Vivek (Nokia - IN/Noida)
• [Sip-implementors] Four sockets open on any SIP client Tuxic Geek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Four sockets open on any SIP client Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Four sockets open on any SIP client Tuxic Geek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Four sockets open on any SIP client Tuxic Geek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Four sockets open on any SIP client Tuxic Geek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Four sockets open on any SIP client Tuxic Geek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Four sockets open on any SIP client Ahmed Hegazy
• [Sip-implementors] Need of From/To Tag in SIP Dialog Harshith Mulky
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Need of From/To Tag in SIP Dialog Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Need of From/To Tag in SIP Dialog Anand Konji
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Need of From/To Tag in SIP Dialog ankur bansal
• [Sip-implementors] DHCP Option on SIP Gateway Kamini Gangwani
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] DHCP Option on SIP Gateway ankur bansal
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] DHCP Option on SIP Gateway Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Difference between a SIP 401 and SIP 407 Responses Harshith Mulky
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Difference between a SIP 401 and SIP 407 Responses Anand Konji
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Difference between a SIP 401 and SIP 407 Responses Tuxic Geek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Difference between a SIP 401 and SIP 407 Responses Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Difference between a SIP 401 and SIP 407 Responses Anand Konji
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Difference between a SIP 401 and SIP 407 Responses Paul Kyzivat
  • [Sip-implementors] Calls With Audio and Drops after 55 Seconds Moysés Mora Delgado .
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Calls With Audio and Drops after 55 Seconds Moysés Mora Delgado .
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Calls With Audio and Drops after 55 Seconds Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Calls With Audio and Drops after 55 Seconds Ryan Mitchell
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Difference between a SIP 401 and SIP 407 Responses Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] Registration Process (3 requests vs 2 requests) Tuxic Geek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Registration Process (3 requests vs 2 requests) Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Registration Process (3 requests vs 2 requests) Tuxic Geek
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Registration Process (3 requests vs 2 requests) Roman Shpount
• [Sip-implementors] Redirection of Call without REFER Mayank Gupta
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Redirection of Call without REFER Pranav Damele
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Redirection of Call without REFER Mayank Gupta
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Redirection of Call without REFER Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Redirection of Call without REFER Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters Maxim Sobolev
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters Maxim Sobolev
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters David Cunningham
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters Maxim Sobolev
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters Maxim Sobolev
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters David Cunningham
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters Maxim Sobolev
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters David Cunningham
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Ordering of Via field value parameters Brett Tate
• [Sip-implementors] Remote-party-id in reinvite Mahudeswaran A
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Remote-party-id in reinvite Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Remote-party-id in reinvite Mahudeswaran A
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Remote-party-id in reinvite Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Remote-party-id in reinvite Vivek Batra
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Remote-party-id in reinvite Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] 3600 sec registration expiration Manoj Priyankara
• [Sip-implementors] SIPREC and call transfer without REFER Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIPREC and call transfer without REFER Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] 3pcc K sipuser
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 3pcc Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 3pcc K sipuser
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 3pcc Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 3pcc K sipuser
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 3pcc Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 3pcc K sipuser
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 3pcc Brett Tate
• [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Eize Slange
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Talwar, Vivek (Nokia - IN/Noida)
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Eize Slange
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Sabyasachi Samal
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] In dialog UPDATE crossing reINVITE: allowed? Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP version increment without SDP change in early dialog Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] m lines after after SDP offer/answer exchange failure Andrea Rizzi
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] m lines after after SDP offer/answer exchange failure Brett Tate
• [Sip-implementors] Question About CRBT Server Jimmy Toussaint
• [Sip-implementors] RFC 7315: multiple P-Charging-Function-Addresses headers Brett Tate
• [Sip-implementors] Two provisional responses in one dialog: 180 Ringing and 183 Session Progress Franz Edler
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Two provisional responses in one dialog: 180 Ringing and 183 Session Progress Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Two provisional responses in one dialog: 180 Ringing and 183 Session Progress Franz Edler
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Two provisional responses in one dialog: 180 Ringing and 183 Session Progress Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Two provisional responses in one dialog: 180 Ringing and 183 Session Progress Andrea Rizzi
• [Sip-implementors] RFC 3261: header field parameter ordering Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 3261: header field parameter ordering Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] Near end NAT traversal Ananth Kollipara
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Near end NAT traversal Brett Tate
• [Sip-implementors] R-URI on ACK David Cunningham
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] R-URI on ACK Joegen Baclor
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] R-URI on ACK David Cunningham
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] R-URI on ACK Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] R-URI on ACK David Cunningham
• [Sip-implementors] Possible valid response code for PRACK? Ajit Singh1
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Possible valid response code for PRACK? Brett Tate
• [Sip-implementors] Message Body in BYE Parveen Verma
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Message Body in BYE Iñaki Baz Castillo
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Message Body in BYE Aman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Message Body in BYE Tarun2 Gupta
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Message Body in BYE Iñaki Baz Castillo
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Message Body in BYE Tarun2 Gupta
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Message Body in BYE Aman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Message Body in BYE Parveen Verma
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Message Body in BYE Brett Tate
• [Sip-implementors] SIP call forking and PRACK to 1XX responses Aman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP call forking and PRACK to 1XX responses Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP call forking and PRACK to 1XX responses Aman
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP call forking and PRACK to 1XX responses Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP call forking and PRACK to 1XX responses Aman
• [Sip-implementors] Question about "order" parameter in NAPTR records Franz Edler
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Question about "order" parameter in NAPTR records Brett Tate
• [Sip-implementors] SIP Reinvite after T38 Negotitaion NK
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP Reinvite after T38 Negotitaion Kumar, Puneet (Puneet)
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP Reinvite after T38 Negotitaion NK
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP Reinvite after T38 Negotitaion Tarun2 Gupta
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP Reinvite after T38 Negotitaion NK
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP Reinvite after T38 Negotitaion Dmitry Akindinov
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP Reinvite after T38 Negotitaion OKUMURA Shinji
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP Reinvite after T38 Negotitaion Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] Difference between DTLS-SRTP and SRTP packet send over DTLS connections Priyaranjan Nayak
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Difference between DTLS-SRTP and SRTP packet send over DTLS connections Iñaki Baz Castillo
• [Sip-implementors] sip trunking question Paul Heitkemper
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] sip trunking question Alex Balashov
• [Sip-implementors] No Session Expire Header in 200 OK NK
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] No Session Expire Header in 200 OK Tarun2 Gupta
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] No Session Expire Header in 200 OK Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] No Session Expire Header in 200 OK Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] No Session Expire Header in 200 OK Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] No Session Expire Header in 200 OK NK
• [Sip-implementors] ***SPAM*** trunk information needed Paul Heitkemper
• [Sip-implementors] IP-CAN K sipuser
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] IP-CAN K sipuser
• [Sip-implementors] Multiple telephone-event in "m" line Gaurav Khare
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Multiple telephone-event in "m" line Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Multiple telephone-event in "m" line Neelakantan, Neel
• Re: [Sip-implementors] From Header value is getting changed from 100 trying to 200OK Brett Tate
• Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer answer model.... Updated isshed
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer answer model.... Updated Paul Kyzivat
  • [Sip-implementors] Offer answer model.... Updated isshed
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer answer model.... Updated Paul Kyzivat
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] Offer answer model.... Updated isshed
• [Sip-implementors] From Header value is getting changed from 100 trying to 200OK Sourav Dhar Chaudhuri
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] From Header value is getting changed from 100 trying to 200OK Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] From Header value is getting changed from 100 trying to 200OK Neelakantan, Neel
• [Sip-implementors] how to share same RTP's ssrc value in between calling party and called party ? Priyaranjan Nayak
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] how to share same RTP's ssrc value in between calling party and called party ? Dale R. Worley
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] [Srtp-users] how to share same RTP's ssrc value in between calling party and called party ? John Foley
• [Sip-implementors] RFC 6665: Event header parameters Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 6665: Event header parameters Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 6665: Event header parameters Dale R. Worley
• [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Joel Gerber
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Joel Gerber
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Joel Gerber
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Roger Wiklund
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] 183 with 100rel required, followed by 180 with 100rel supported Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] SDP attribute for hold and rersume isshed
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP attribute for hold and rersume Brett Tate
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP attribute for hold and rersume isshed
  • Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP attribute for hold and rersume Paul Kyzivat
• [Sip-implementors] IPSec supporting open source SIP Server Priyaranjan Nayak
• [Sip-implementors] SIP messages in IPSec communication Priyaranjan Nayak

• Earlier messages
• Later messages