[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: sip-implementors
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] change in tag field in To header
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat () alum ! mit ! edu>
Date: 2013-02-28 22:02:06
Message-ID: 512FD3DE.6030908 () alum ! mit ! edu
[Download RAW message or body]
On 3/1/13 4:27 AM, Neel Neelakantan wrote:
> Ramesh,
>
> See inline.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sip-implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-
> > implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Ramesh Babu
> > Kuppili
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:42 AM
> > To: Paul Kyzivat; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] change in tag field in To header
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > Sorry. I mistyped UAC. I meant to say UAC. Not UAS. Corrected text:
> >
> > Thanks for the response. Is there any way to know how many forks were
> > made by a proxy. My application is VoIP. I need to provide some kind of
> > error tone when the UAC determines that the call cannot be landed on any
> > of the forks. Ideally, I would like to know the total number of forks made by
> > the proxy and provide error tone to the voice user when all the forks
> > responsed with error final responsed.
> >
> [Neel]
> It is not possible to know how many forks the proxy (or subsequent downstream \
> proxy) made. Typically a proxy when forks, it collects all the responses and send \
> only one (See section 16 of RFC 3261)).
There is no way to *know* how many forks there were.
You can use certain information to guess. This may work better in some
deployments than others. Namely:
1) You can note the total number of to-tags you see in responses. You
may get 1xx responses with a number of different to-tags, as you have
seen, as well as a final response that may be from a to-tag already seen
or a different one. This will fail to count forks that fail without
sending a 1xx.
2) You may look for a History-Info header in the responses. If found, it
may be analyzed to count the number of forks. This of course will only
work if History-Info is used by the systems involved. (History-Info is
specified by RFC4244, and there is a nearly complete revision called
draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-11.
Thanks,
Paul
> > Thanks again for your time.
> >
> > - ramesh
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sip-implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-
> > implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Ramesh Babu
> > Kuppili
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 10:51 AM
> > To: Paul Kyzivat; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] change in tag field in To header
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > Thanks for the response. Is there any way to know how many forks were
> > made by a proxy. My application is VoIP. I need to provide some kind of
> > error tone when the UAS determines that the call cannot be landed on any
> > of the forks. Ideally, I would like to know the total number of forks made by
> > the proxy and provide error tone to the voice user when all the forks
> > responsed with error final responsed.
> >
> > Thanks again for your time.
> >
> > - ramesh
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sip-implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-
> > implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Kyzivat
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 3:50 AM
> > To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] change in tag field in To header
> >
> > On 2/27/13 12:38 AM, Ramesh Babu Kuppili wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I am having a problem with the To tag in the incoming "603 Declined" from
> > UAS.
> > >
> > > 1. Outgoing INVITE
> > > - no tag in the To header.
> > > 2. Incoming "183 Session Progress"
> > > - To tag -
> > tag=h7g4Esbg_p65547t1361882364m374065c90075s1_4069438959-13.
> > Incoming "603 Declined"
> > > - To tag -
> > > tag=h7g4Esbg_p65547t1361882364m374065c90075s1_4069388685-
> > 1940037509
> > > Can the To tag change from "183 Session Progress" to "603 Declined". How
> > do the UAS handle this?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > This is consistent with the request having been forked by a proxy.
> > The 183 came from one fork. Then the 603 came from a different fork.
> > Once this has happened, you generally will get no further response from the
> > first fork.
> >
> > Good Luck,
> > Paul
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip-implementors mailing list
> > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic