On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:28 PM, JOLY, ROBERT (ROBERT) <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Attached is a sip trace (from QA) for a call hold ( with MOH)
>> and resume operation which results in no voice path after
>> resume. Problem reported is that after the call resume there
>> is no media path. Looking at the pcap, the ITSP sends G729
>> whereas sipx sends the ITSP G711 ( asymmetric meida ).
>>
>> Note that on the re-INVITE (with SDP), sipX sends the ITSP
>> all supported codecs (including G729 - I need to filter this
>> out but that is a different problem ). The phone selects G711
>> and ITSP sends in
>> G711 in the period of time following Frame 46. This is legal
>> ( the ITSP answered with G711 and G729)  However, it appears
>> that the asymmetry of the media stream causes the observed
>> problem of no speech path. So there appears to be an ITSP
>> issue at hand.
>>
>> The asymmetric codec problem can be resolved again by
>> sipxbridge restricting all re-INVITEs responses to  to that
>> codec negotiated for the FIRST call setup. This seems quite
>> restrictive however and clearly the RFC allows for multiple
>> codecs in the response to that re-INVITE but there is no
>> speech path. So I am wondering if I should implement a single
>> codec restriction on the re-INVITE response to avoid the situation.
>
> One possible approach that would less restrictive would be for the sipXbridge 
> to implement the codec lockdown procedure described in RFC3264 section 10.2 
> when it sees an SDP containing for than 1 codec.

Thanks but I am not sure I follow. I would have thought that the codec
lockdown is upto the endpoints ( in this case the ITSP and the phone
). Why would sipxbridge need to take an active part other than to
relay the signaling?

Regards,

Ranga

-- 
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
sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/

Reply via email to