> 
> On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 15:31 -0400, M. Ranganathan wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Attached is a call flow for consultative transfer after call pickup.
> > This time I am getting a 407 from the proxy again when I 
> send out an 
> > INVITE in Frame 110 ( see attached merged.xml)  but the 
> difference is 
> > I don't have x-sipx-auth-identity header that I can use for this 
> > generated INVITE after the REFER for the transfer.  So the 
> question is
> > 
> > 1. should I use a From header something like 
> > [email protected] so the proxy will not 
> generate the 
> > challenge. I am not too happy about changing the From 
> Header mid call.
> > Not sure if this is the right thing to do.
> > 2. What would be the appropriate x-sipx-auth-identity to 
> attach to the INVITE?
> 
> No - an INVITE with a Replaces should not be challenged - 
> this is a proxy bug.

The auth plug-ins indeed do not challenge an INVITE with replaces (c.f.
TransferControl) but the PAI will continue to challenge any
dialog-forming INVITE that appears to originate from a user with
credentials.  That PAI is a building block that enables reliable
user-based features which 'location-based gateway selection' is the
first embodiment.  Exempting INVITEs-with-Replaces requests from being
challenged for the purposes of adding a PAI header will make them unable
to participate in any user-based feature.  IMO, this is less than
desirable.

I was wondering if we could deal with this issue some other way and
provide sipXbridge with an identity the same way we already do for park,
media, acd, config, sipXrls and registrar.  This would allow it to reply
to challenges which would solve the problem at hand.
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev

Reply via email to