On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 11:36 -0500, Dale Worley wrote: > On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 11:26 -0500, Scott Lawrence wrote: > > This has to be put in context: that the mission of sipXbridge is to > > interface to ITSPs and other lame systems that require hacks like > > registration for the domain and intercepting REFER, _not_ to be a > > general purpose interface to other SIP systems (we want those to go > > direct to sipXproxy, which _would_ just return the challenge responses). > > True... But do we expect ITSPs to handle 403 responses better than > 401/407s?
What 'handle'? Both are just failures, in effect, but at least 403 is an unambiguous failure. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
