Hi,
 
I have tried with latest Sipp version from sipp.svn ,Still there is an issue 
with branch parameter . Even tried the options with branch=[branch-3] etc.
 branch parameter is always different from Initial  Invite.
 
Does any one knows whats going wrong here?
 
Best Regards,
Ckumar.

--- On Tue, 19/4/11, mayamatakeshi <mayamatake...@gmail.com> wrote:


From: mayamatakeshi <mayamatake...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sipp-users] Sipp Scripts
To: "chandan kumar" <chandan_...@yahoo.co.in>
Cc: "Sipp" <sipp-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
Date: Tuesday, 19 April, 2011, 1:39 PM


Please remember to post to the list.


On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:31 PM, chandan kumar <chandan_...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:






Hi Mayamatakeshi,
 
Thanks I will try . 
 
I have one simple query, When UA sends CANCEL request UAS responds with  200 ok.

Responds "200 OK" to INVITE or to CANCEL? Just look at the packets and check 
CSeq.







 
Then 487 is send to UA by UAS (here cseq header is CANCEL) .

If "487" is as response to an INVITE, then the CSeq header must contain 
"INVITE".
 





In this case after a while  UA retransmitting CANCEL request once again to UAS.
 
retransmission of CANCEL is right or wrong?


SIPp will keep retransmitting the message until the proper response indicated 
in the subsequent recv tag is received.

 






 
Best Regards,
Ckumar.
--- On Mon, 18/4/11, mayamatakeshi <mayamatake...@gmail.com> wrote:


From: mayamatakeshi <mayamatake...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sipp-users] Sipp Scripts
To: "chandan kumar" <chandan_...@yahoo.co.in>
Cc: sipp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Monday, 18 April, 2011, 4:50 PM





On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 8:08 PM, mayamatakeshi <mayamatake...@gmail.com> wrote:





On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 7:37 PM, mayamatakeshi <mayamatake...@gmail.com> wrote:




On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 7:30 PM, chandan kumar <chandan_...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:





I have actually tried even with this Via: SIP/2.0/[transport] 
[local_ip]:[local_port];branch=[branch-3]


The SIPp web site is off line now. 
So I am not sure how exactly [branch-X] works.
Try:

Via: SIP/2.0/[transport] [local_ip]:[local_port];branch=[branch-1]


I got a cached version of the doc:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:fwOuDCIa9y0J:sipp.sourceforge.net/doc3.0/reference.html+http://sipp.sourceforge.net/doc3.0/reference.html&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.com
 

I think the original code [branch-3] is correct.
If it doesn't work, maybe you are using an old version of sipp.


Also, I believe [branch] is a convenience keyword, but which we can do without.
You could generate the value of branch by hand using something like: 
branch=z9hG4bK-[$n]-YourMessageIndex

 








 








Still  the same issue.

--- On Mon, 18/4/11, mayamatakeshi <mayamatake...@gmail.com> wrote:


From: mayamatakeshi <mayamatake...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Sipp-users] Sipp Scripts
To: "chandan kumar" <chandan_...@yahoo.co.in>
Cc: sipp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Monday, 18 April, 2011, 3:31 PM 








On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 6:54 PM, chandan kumar <chandan_...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:






Hi mayamatkeshi,
 
You are right .Incase of remote cancel  Last Cseq header method should be 
INVITE (for 487)  . In my script  it was  CANCEL (for 487 ). thats why my Voip 
phone is not sending ACK.
 
Now it works fine. Thanks a lot .
 
 
Coming to Local Cancel. I have checked the INVITE & CANCEL request both are 
same except branch parameter in Via is different.
 
I have attached my script & ethereal capture. Please let me know  why Sipp is 
changing branch parameter for CANCEL.
 

I told you in my first email:

Try this in the CANCEL: 
  Via: SIP/2.0/[transport] [local_ip]:[local_port];branch=[branch-3]





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload 
Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top
priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve 
application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting 
the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
Sipp-users mailing list
Sipp-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sipp-users

Reply via email to