Hi Andrew, I got the chance to look at the tcp dumps you have sent to George. The reason why SLA does not work is because the NOTIFY's sent by RLS is rejected by the Polycom with a 403. This does not seem to be the case with UDP. However, there are some NOTIFY's in the UDP captures which end up with a "Loop Detected Error" sent by Polycom which is a bit odd. We have seen this behavior in the past and scrutinizing the packets does not reveal anything wrong with the NOTIFY's sent. With all this leading to back to Polycom, I think it is quite time that we get some Polycom strings to pull. Hopefully they are tuned in to this mailing list.
Joegen On 04/14/2011 01:22 AM, andrewpitman wrote: > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > Organization: SipXecs Forum > X-FUDforum: 08063afcdd00a6e76393c5b9527381e8<58586> > Message-ID:<[email protected]> > > > > I've noticed something odd while testing shared line > appearance for remote workers in sipXecs 4.4.0. My phones > are Polycom 450s running firmware 3.2.5, but I noticed the > same behavior in 3.2.4. > > When my remote workers' primary (non-shared) line and the > shared line have TCPonly set for "Outbound Proxy Transport" > for their registrations, there is no line presence > indication shown on any of the other phones when a call is > up on the shared line. When I set the registration for the > shared line only to be UDPonly on all the phones, shared > line appears to work normally. That is, a solid light for > the appearance when on a call, blinking when on hold and the > call on hold can be picked up on any phone with the shared > line when blinking. > > Has anyone else seen this? > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/ > _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
