On 11/21/08, Kathleen Eccles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 10:16 -0500, Robert Joly wrote: >> > On 11/21/08, Robert Joly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Robert Joly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > >> wrote:>> >> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Arjun Nair >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> I>> > M. Ranganathan wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > I already to session timer support for interaction with the >> > ITSP since I cannot rely upon UAs to provide session timer >> > re-INVITE. I hence have no need to forward your session timer INVITE. >> >> So, if I understand correctly, the problem is one of unecessary >> overhead? Given that Arjun's re-INVITE is once every 5 minutes for held >> calls, I do not think this represents any kind of load to lose sleep >> over unless I'm missing something. >> > > so are we all agreed on the following? > > xecs-1594 (stuck moh) behavior: > - leave fix as is (OPTIONS for moh; reINVITE for park orbit) > - sipxbridge will deal with this appropriately
sipxbridge will deal with re-INVITE. After all this is quite legal and recommended practice so sipxbridge should deal with it. Please do not change the SDP for the keepalive however so I refrain from forwarding your keep alive. Thanks. > > -kathy > > -- M. Ranganathan _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
