I am using soft clients of both Eyebeam and SJphone. The discrepancy exists
between OSBC and SIPX in the same manner.
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [sipx-users] Registration Expiration Discrepancy between OSBC
andSIPX
Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 11:27:23 +0400
I don’t know if it’s worth trying (and if it’s possible and how) to modify
those intervals in sipx. But as a workaround you can set requested time to 300
sec. in the UA, which looks to be a min. registration period in sipx.
(Not discussing that you would better use different, standard conforming UA).
HTH, Nikolay.
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of wenjun
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:42 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [sipx-users] Registration Expiration Discrepancy between OSBC andSIPX
Hi, some guy in OSBC forum told me this issue was well documentd in the SIPX
mailing list. SIPX always replies with a registration interval that is smaller
than the one requested by the UA. If the US does not adhere to the lesser
interval by re-registering, then it will become unregistered for a short time.
The kludgy work around for this is to set the MIN and MAX registartion interval
in SIPX to be the same value as the interval in the registration request from
the UA.
Any one can instruct me how/where to set the proper MIN/MAX registration
internal in SIPX ?
Regards,
Jun
更多热辣资讯尽在新版MSN首页！ 立刻访问！
_________________________________________________________________
上Windows Live 中国首页，下载最新版 MSN！
http://im.live.cn/
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
