From salil.verma@nsn.com Fri Jul 1 00:24:58 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4D3121F87A9 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 00:24:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EddWsTI0vqYK for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 00:24:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03D5121F87A5 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 00:24:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.56]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p617OuhC031634 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 09:24:56 +0200 Received: from demuexc022.nsn-intra.net (demuexc022.nsn-intra.net [10.150.128.35]) by demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id p617OtF6008655 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 09:24:56 +0200 Received: from SGSIEXC007.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.224.87]) by demuexc022.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 1 Jul 2011 09:24:52 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 15:24:48 +0800 Message-ID: <58F8E91237A10F4AA40BEBCF0A766617B6E49B@SGSIEXC007.nsn-intra.net> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Sip Digest, Vol 82, Issue 6 Thread-Index: Acw3WGO4BcHs2W8nS2uJsAH9iiYEJQAZ0bcg References: From: "Verma, Salil (NSN - IN/Gurgaon)" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Jul 2011 07:24:52.0676 (UTC) FILETIME=[F80CA040:01CC37BF] Subject: Re: [Sip] Sip Digest, Vol 82, Issue 6 X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 07:24:59 -0000 I want to start a new thread of query . What the procedure of that ? My Query to SIP experts :- During a sip call I noticed in SIP msg I found a error code "Reason:X.int ;reasoncode=3D0x0000070E;add-info=3D05CC.0004.0006"=20 How to decode this msg , any supporting doc will be helpful . Thanks,=20 Best Regards=20 sAlil veRmA=20 Tech . Supp. Grp ( Care Team ) NCS : sip: salil.verma@nsn.com +91 9958298813=20 -----Original Message----- From: sip-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext sip-request@ietf.org Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 12:30 AM To: sip@ietf.org Subject: Sip Digest, Vol 82, Issue 6 If you have received this digest without all the individual message attachments you will need to update your digest options in your list subscription. To do so, go to=20 https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip Click the 'Unsubscribe or edit options' button, log in, and set "Get MIME or Plain Text Digests?" to MIME. You can set this option globally for all the list digests you receive at this point. Send Sip mailing list submissions to sip@ietf.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to sip-request@ietf.org You can reach the person managing the list at sip-owner@ietf.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Sip digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: 302 Redirect on REGISTER (Orrin Doyle) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 09:08:16 -0700 From: Orrin Doyle To: I?aki Baz Castillo Cc: "sip@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Sip] 302 Redirect on REGISTER Message-ID: <6FFE1500-B54A-4F0F-B688-B4FC44189C22@yeagerworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dutf-8 In fact, I contacted them about this functionality and they apparently don't currently support redirect responses for register messages in any current code rev, though it is planned as part of a future release. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 29, 2011, at 1:13 AM, I?aki Baz Castillo wrote: > 2011/6/28 Orrin Doyle : >> The Polycom 601 I have running 2.1 app didn't support this... >=20 > Thanks for sharing it. Bye. >=20 > --=20 > I?aki Baz Castillo > ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip End of Sip Digest, Vol 82, Issue 6 ********************************** From ibc@aliax.net Fri Jul 1 02:00:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA1CA21F867F for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 02:00:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2VVf+eJikAre for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 02:00:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00EF121F8688 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 02:00:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qyk9 with SMTP id 9so651994qyk.10 for ; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 02:00:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.23.69 with SMTP id q5mr2277626qcb.249.1309510841233; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 02:00:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.240.15 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Jul 2011 02:00:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <58F8E91237A10F4AA40BEBCF0A766617B6E49B@SGSIEXC007.nsn-intra.net> References: <58F8E91237A10F4AA40BEBCF0A766617B6E49B@SGSIEXC007.nsn-intra.net> Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 11:00:41 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= To: "Verma, Salil (NSN - IN/Gurgaon)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: sip@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sip] Sip Digest, Vol 82, Issue 6 X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 09:00:42 -0000 2011/7/1 Verma, Salil (NSN - IN/Gurgaon) : > I want to start a new thread of query . What the procedure of that ? > > My Query to SIP experts :- During a sip call I noticed in SIP msg I > found a error code "Reason:X.int > ;reasoncode=3D0x0000070E;add-info=3D05CC.0004.0006" > > How to decode this msg , any supporting doc will be helpful . Hi Salil, please use sip-implementors maillist for this kind of questions. This mailist is intended for discussing the SIP protocol specifications rather than implementation issues. BTW, your Reason header seems to have a custom value (vendor dependant for sure) as the Reason header is specified in RFC 3326 and its syntax has nothing to do with your above header: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3326#section-2 Reason: SIP ;cause=3D200 ;text=3D"Call completed elsewhere" Reason: Q.850 ;cause=3D16 ;text=3D"Terminated" Reason: SIP ;cause=3D600 ;text=3D"Busy Everywhere" Reason: SIP ;cause=3D580 ;text=3D"Precondition Failure" --=20 I=C3=B1aki Baz Castillo From ibc@aliax.net Fri Jul 8 09:53:06 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2580B21F8B18 for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 09:53:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4yMN82FmRyf6 for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 09:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9345E21F8B82 for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 09:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qwc23 with SMTP id 23so1627553qwc.31 for ; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 09:53:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.224.75 with SMTP id in11mr1695902qcb.211.1310143984919; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 09:53:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.240.15 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 09:53:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 18:53:04 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= To: sip@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ; transport=dccp ? X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2011 16:53:06 -0000 Hi, draft-jennings-sip-dtls defines: - SIP over DTLS over UDP =3D> Via transport: "DTLS-UDP" - SIP over DTLS over DCCP =3D> Via transport: "DTLS-DCCP" - SIP over DCCP =3D> Via transport: "DCCP" The draft just defines new BNF grammar for Via transport field, but says nothing about SIP URI ;transport param. IMHO the draft MUST define a new value "dccp" for ;transport param. Regards, --=20 I=C3=B1aki Baz Castillo From keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com Fri Jul 8 12:10:52 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F41721F8C63 for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 12:10:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oKdrroqbBESN for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 12:10:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB84721F86DA for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 12:10:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.63]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p68IwdWv004612 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 8 Jul 2011 21:10:49 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.47]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.63]) with mapi; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 21:10:21 +0200 From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?I=F1aki_Baz_Castillo?= , "sip@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 21:10:19 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ; transport=dccp ? Thread-Index: Acw9j4gZG+XB6wsdQXOPSKNUGpYEHAAEruAg Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.80 Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ; transport=dccp ? X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2011 19:10:52 -0000 Given that as far as I can see, the last version of this document expired i= n 2008, I think you must regard any contents as historical. It was never picked up by the SIP WG. Regards Keith > -----Original Message----- > From: sip-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > I=F1aki Baz Castillo > Sent: 08 July 2011 17:53 > To: sip@ietf.org > Subject: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ; > transport=3Ddccp ? >=20 > Hi, draft-jennings-sip-dtls defines: >=20 > - SIP over DTLS over UDP =3D> Via transport: "DTLS-UDP" > - SIP over DTLS over DCCP =3D> Via transport: "DTLS-DCCP" > - SIP over DCCP =3D> Via transport: "DCCP" >=20 > The draft just defines new BNF grammar for Via transport field, but > says nothing about SIP URI ;transport param. > IMHO the draft MUST define a new value "dccp" for ;transport param. >=20 > Regards, >=20 >=20 >=20 > -- > I=F1aki Baz Castillo > > _______________________________________________ > Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business. > Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on how to develop a SI= P > implementation. > Use dispatch@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip. > Use sipcore@ietf.org for issues related to maintenance of the core SIP > specifications. From ibc@aliax.net Fri Jul 8 12:52:44 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CB9221F84E8 for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 12:52:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.677 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q6rFjhCC4qbz for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 12:52:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A979D21F8534 for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 12:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qwc23 with SMTP id 23so1724234qwc.31 for ; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 12:52:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.137.149 with SMTP id w21mr1921281qct.59.1310154749057; Fri, 08 Jul 2011 12:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.240.15 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 12:52:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 21:52:29 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "sip@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ; transport=dccp ? X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2011 19:52:44 -0000 2011/7/8 DRAGE, Keith (Keith) : > Given that as far as I can see, the last version of this document expired= in 2008, I think you must regard any contents as historical. > > It was never picked up by the SIP WG. Good point, I didn't realize of that. So, is there a draft or RFC defining SIP over DTLS-UDP? --=20 I=C3=B1aki Baz Castillo From keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com Fri Jul 8 13:36:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4225721F8B5D for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 13:36:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.049 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.049 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wI8b1PCNRFxR for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 13:36:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smail3.alcatel.fr (smail3.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 792FE21F8B45 for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 13:36:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.61]) by smail3.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p68KVKDt000839 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 8 Jul 2011 22:35:57 +0200 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.47]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.61]) with mapi; Fri, 8 Jul 2011 22:32:33 +0200 From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?I=F1aki_Baz_Castillo?= Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 22:32:31 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ; transport=dccp ? Thread-Index: Acw9qJKe1hUtrL0WQcq+WkQUzfolhwABOuew Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.83 Cc: "sip@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ; transport=dccp ? X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2011 20:36:02 -0000 The only SIP document was RFC 5763. That doesn't define it, and doesn't app= arently need it. Keith > -----Original Message----- > From: I=F1aki Baz Castillo [mailto:ibc@aliax.net] > Sent: 08 July 2011 20:52 > To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith) > Cc: sip@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-jennings-sip-dtls: shouldn't it define ; > transport=3Ddccp ? >=20 > 2011/7/8 DRAGE, Keith (Keith) : > > Given that as far as I can see, the last version of this document > expired in 2008, I think you must regard any contents as historical. > > > > It was never picked up by the SIP WG. >=20 > Good point, I didn't realize of that. So, is there a draft or RFC > defining SIP over DTLS-UDP? >=20 > -- > I=F1aki Baz Castillo > From Fred_Stacey@Mitel.com Sat Jul 9 12:12:11 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 146F321F85B8 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2011 12:12:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.093, BAYES_40=-0.185] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0vlfxRZ5pNHh for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2011 12:12:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.mitel.com (smtp.mitel.com [216.191.234.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 631C521F8591 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2011 12:12:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (smtp.mitel.com [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.mitel.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C58E42C013 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2011 15:12:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new (virusonly) at mitel.com Received: from smtp.mitel.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.mitel.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sRoq0aqC+NRv for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2011 15:12:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ottlnmta.mitel.com (ottlnmta.mitel.com [10.44.16.150]) by smtp.mitel.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4CF72C00D for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2011 15:12:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Fred_Stacey@Mitel.com To: sip@ietf.org Message-ID: Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 15:12:08 -0400 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on OTTLNMTA/Mitel(Release 6.5.6FP3|March 27, 2008) at 07/09/2011 03:12:09 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Sip] Fred Stacey is out of the office. X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2011 19:12:11 -0000 I will be out of the office starting 07/01/2011 and will not return until 07/11/2011. I will be out of the office From July 1 to July 10 inclusive. If your inquiry is regarding Mitel AnyWare, please direct to mitel_anyware_sales@mitel.com. If your inquiry is regarding MICD or the Mitel Service Provider Program, please direct to Andrew Moses (andrew_moses@mitel.com) From shivalk_80@yahoo.co.in Wed Jul 13 08:29:48 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB14321F888A for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:29:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QuBP-Qhu+Tva for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:29:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm2.bullet.mail.in.yahoo.com (nm2.bullet.mail.in.yahoo.com [121.101.151.224]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 4741F21F8888 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [121.101.151.238] by nm2.bullet.mail.in.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 13 Jul 2011 15:29:52 -0000 Received: from [121.101.151.235] by tm3.bullet.mail.in.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 13 Jul 2011 15:30:21 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1004.mail.in.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 13 Jul 2011 15:29:40 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 455222.56980.bm@omp1004.mail.in.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 65020 invoked by uid 60001); 13 Jul 2011 15:29:40 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.co.in; s=s1024; t=1310570980; bh=V3AleTZuNihh4VUmRk/2TXsRHI+Nb0H6ojJuFgMfHJM=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=pIHBSrBEKHEmShB2ArcGNVddwdBeOFrBmMlrH/qe8EJkzOEw6ne0rWYB1LI7q63UbU0mVyEQoLWG8kqCaJoob5jZ1h2XzI6pekSCw7wbBCY4A41vbqCYABE1z+cY0LUBOBksH8RwzdLbOvVBQxwDjNVD9jvjNex/D6AuPk+7eh8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.in; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=QsSo9zlNuHM/10pBYbjMqrYyMrO3UHfrP1D1pbg5tFM551W/vKCeryrSJC2gotOeVZP1/SlelrXjx4fJ7Z5/tmXBv66UbalBafentCX6uJfha+vLqWtm7E8D32Fk9r6uQ2zbzran6pwbysGmCWy0nyhfRK2gXUeq1Q5QQCUAdv4=; X-YMail-OSG: .1CcdOUVM1mljheJ.ZaHjOMyDaJC7MJFP4yksetfIxBgODI mbKXw16pBwMbTR3cE.jPPDynQX5kIJuPUS4TxarsvSILC73lWbDcVj5DPks9 RJAs_4i3VAJBPQ6G_8VjAYfOPqeiRC4FBSiQGIZHYi9K4y4bULjq6HUvAkYK 6d2veBPrB9_786j4jJbTtTWKrcXEm8SDpZDayS06OBCkiXcvmHTkD_TsNPBD nvrIYRnCkQQksV00dXqHm7b.sKmqCTAFzyyi.6b.JUu.Mj4aFE.TyXklDl_D emoMysbZ0hY0QdzFoYv1WKyOHlHnM77aLmrOHlo8TJvmnAMKGJVFQJNu39iD J5.anNj7iUcrtvWCSZ1ZXulFAwDaf Received: from [59.161.81.204] by web94802.mail.in2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 20:59:40 IST X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/14.0.3 YahooMailWebService/0.8.112.307740 Message-ID: <1310570980.43882.YahooMailClassic@web94802.mail.in2.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 20:59:40 +0530 (IST) From: atul garg To: sip@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-644347746-1310570980=:43882" Subject: [Sip] Codec Negotiation and renegotiataion X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 15:29:49 -0000 --0-644347746-1310570980=:43882 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello All, =A0 I have very basic question regarding the codec negotiation in SIP, I will t= ry to summarize my queries below - =A0 1) If A=A0is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list say (= 1,2,3) =A0=A0=A0=A0=20 =A0=A0=A0 A -->=A0 INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 ( B supp= orts 1 , 3, 5) =A0=A0=A0 A <--=A0 200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here 1, 2 ,3 OR 1, 3, 5)=A0= <-- B =A0 =A0=A0 if it is 1, 3, 5 then what will be the response to B ?? =A0 2)=A0 If A=A0is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list sa= y (1,2,3) =A0=A0=A0=A0=20 =A0=A0=A0 A -->=A0 INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 ( B supp= orts=A0 2 , 3, 5) =A0=A0=A0 A <--=A0 200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here=A02 , 3 OR=A0 2 , 3, 5= )=A0 <-- B =A0 =A0=A0 if it is=A02 , 3 =A0then what will be the response to B ?? =A0=A0 if it is=A02 , 3, 5=A0=A0then what will be the response to B ?? =A0 3)=A0 If A=A0is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list sa= y (1,2,3) =A0=A0=A0=A0=20 =A0=A0=A0 A -->=A0 INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 ( B supp= orts=A0 4, 5,6) =A0=A0=A0 A <--=A0 200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here=A0??)=A0 <-- B =A0 and what will be the d behaviour of A .... =A0=A0=20 4) Re-Negotiation - =A0 =A0=A0 If A=A0is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list s= ay (1,2,3) =A0=A0=A0=A0=20 =A0=A0=A0 A -->=A0 INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 ( B supp= orts 1 , 2, 3) =A0=A0=A0 A <--=A0 200 OK ( SDP audio1, 2 ,3=A0=A0 <-- B =A0=A0=A0 A --> ACK --> B =A0 ( I guess the rtp will use codec 1) =A0 =A0 Now during the call say A wants to change the codec to 2, will it send = the re-invite or SDP session has some provision for it( I just want to conf= irm, is it possible to change the codec without sending any SIP message) =A0 PS: I know i have made a lengthy mail, but=A0=A0it is very much required fo= r me to understand some network behaviour and implementation. =A0 Regards Atul --0-644347746-1310570980=:43882 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello All,
 
I have very basic question regarding the codec negotiation in SIP, I w= ill try to summarize my queries below -
 
1) If A is initiating the call and sending the supported codec li= st say (1,2,3)
    
    A -->  INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) -->= B      ( B supports 1 , 3, 5)
    A <--  200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here= 1, 2 ,3 OR 1, 3, 5)  <-- B
 
   if it is 1, 3, 5 then what will be the response to B ??
 
2)  If A is initiating the call and sending the supported co= dec list say (1,2,3)
    
    A -->  INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) -->= B      ( B supports  2 , 3, 5)
    A <--  200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here=  2 , 3 OR  2 , 3, 5)  <-- B
 
   if it is 2 , 3  then what will be the response = to B ??
   if it is 2 , 3, 5  then what will be the r= esponse to B ??
 
3)  If A is initiating the call and sending the supported co= dec list say (1,2,3)
    
    A -->  INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) -->= B      ( B supports  4, 5,6)
    A <--  200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here=  ??)  <-- B
  and what will be the d behaviour of A ....
  
4) Re-Negotiation -
 
   If A is initiating the call and sending the supporte= d codec list say (1,2,3)
    
    A -->  INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) -->= B      ( B supports 1 , 2, 3)
    A <--  200 OK ( SDP audio1, 2 ,3  = ; <-- B
    A --> ACK --> B
 
( I guess the rtp will use codec 1)
 
  Now during the call say A wants to change the codec to 2, will = it send the re-invite or SDP session has some provision for it( I just want= to confirm, is it possible to change the codec without sending any SIP mes= sage)
 
PS: I know i have made a lengthy mail, but  it is very much = required for me to understand some network behaviour and implementation.
 
Regards
Atul
--0-644347746-1310570980=:43882-- From siddiqui.noman@siemens-enterprise.com Wed Jul 13 08:56:52 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C4AD21F8610 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:56:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z-Gyg33bcaca for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:56:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail21.messagelabs.com (mail21.messagelabs.com [85.158.143.35]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B953521F85EA for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:56:50 -0700 (PDT) X-VirusChecked: Checked X-Env-Sender: siddiqui.noman@siemens-enterprise.com X-Msg-Ref: server-11.tower-21.messagelabs.com!1310572598!44157112!1 X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.17; banners=-,-,- X-Originating-IP: [62.134.46.9] Received: (qmail 23390 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2011 15:56:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO senmx11-mx) (62.134.46.9) by server-11.tower-21.messagelabs.com with SMTP; 13 Jul 2011 15:56:38 -0000 Received: from MCHP063A.global-ad.net (unknown [172.29.37.61]) by senmx11-mx (Server) with ESMTP id 1F25D1EB83EE; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:56:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from MCHP057A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.27]) by MCHP063A.global-ad.net ([172.29.37.61]) with mapi; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:56:48 +0200 From: "Siddiqui, Noman" To: atul garg , "sip@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:54:28 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Sip] Codec Negotiation and renegotiataion Thread-Index: AcxBccHNx6zX27wcRiufwom2MJuGiAAAsvvA Message-ID: <7B5D2E520D838A45838DE68F4030DC2D0444DB1983@MCHP057A.global-ad.net> References: <1310570980.43882.YahooMailClassic@web94802.mail.in2.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1310570980.43882.YahooMailClassic@web94802.mail.in2.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7B5D2E520D838A45838DE68F4030DC2D0444DB1983MCHP057Agloba_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Sip] Codec Negotiation and renegotiataion X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 15:56:52 -0000 --_000_7B5D2E520D838A45838DE68F4030DC2D0444DB1983MCHP057Agloba_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Atul, Please see inline. Kind Regards, Noman Siddiqui ________________________________ From: sip-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of atul = garg Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 11:30 AM To: sip@ietf.org Subject: [Sip] Codec Negotiation and renegotiataion Hello All, I have very basic question regarding the codec negotiation in SIP, I will t= ry to summarize my queries below - 1) If A is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list say (1,= 2,3) A --> INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B ( B supports 1 , 3, 5) A <-- 200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here 1, 2 ,3 OR 1, 3, 5) <-- B [Mohammed Noman Siddiqui] B would send 1, 3 in 200 OK if it is 1, 3, 5 then what will be the response to B ?? [Mohammed Noman Siddiqui] What do you mean by response to B. B is sending t= he response to A as above 2) If A is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list say (1= ,2,3) A --> INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B ( B supports 2 , 3, 5) A <-- 200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here 2 , 3 OR 2 , 3, 5) <-- B [Mohammed Noman Siddiqui] 2,3 if it is 2 , 3 then what will be the response to B ?? if it is 2 , 3, 5 then what will be the response to B ?? 3) If A is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list say (1= ,2,3) A --> INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B ( B supports 4, 5,6) A <-- 200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here ??) <-- B and what will be the d behaviour of A .... [Mohammed Noman Siddiqui] B would send 488 Not Acceptable here 4) Re-Negotiation - If A is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list say (1,= 2,3) A --> INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B ( B supports 1 , 2, 3) A <-- 200 OK ( SDP audio1, 2 ,3 <-- B A --> ACK --> B ( I guess the rtp will use codec 1) [Mohammed Noman Siddiqui] Yes, RTP will use codec 1, however both sides sho= uld be able to dynamically switch the payload to either 2 and 3 Now during the call say A wants to change the codec to 2, will it send th= e re-invite or SDP session has some provision for it( I just want to confir= m, is it possible to change the codec without sending any SIP message) [Mohammed Noman Siddiqui] Yes, dynamic payload switching based on the negot= iated codecs list is permitted. Unfortunately, many devices do not support = this and hence its better to do the re-negotiation. PS: I know i have made a lengthy mail, but it is very much required for me= to understand some network behaviour and implementation. Regards Atul --_000_7B5D2E520D838A45838DE68F4030DC2D0444DB1983MCHP057Agloba_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Atul,
 
Please see inline.
 
Kin= d=20 Regards,
Nom= an=20 Siddiqui
 
From: sip-bounces@ietf.org=20 [mailto:sip-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of atul garg
Sent:= =20 Wednesday, July 13, 2011 11:30 AM
To: sip@ietf.org
Subject:= =20 [Sip] Codec Negotiation and renegotiataion

Hello All,
 
I have very basic question regarding the codec negotiation in SI= P, I=20 will try to summarize my queries below -
 
1) If A is initiating the call and sending the supported co= dec=20 list say (1,2,3)
    
    A -->  INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3)= =20 --> B      ( B supports 1 , 3, 5)
    A <--  200 OK ( SDP -> what will b= e=20 here 1, 2 ,3 OR 1, 3, 5)  <-- B
[Mohammed=20 Noman Siddiqui] B would send 1, 3 in 200 OK=20  
 
   if it is 1, 3, 5 then what will be the response to = B=20 ??
[Mohammed Noman Siddiqui] What do you mean by response = to B. B=20 is sending the response to A as above
 
2)  If A is initiating the call and sending the suppor= ted=20 codec list say (1,2,3)
    
    A -->  INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3)= =20 --> B      ( B supports  2 , 3, 5)
    A <--  200 OK ( SDP -> what will b= e=20 here 2 , 3 OR  2 , 3, 5)  <-- B
[Mohammed=20 Noman Siddiqui] 2,3 
 
   if it is 2 , 3  then what will be the res= ponse=20 to B ??
   if it is 2 , 3, 5  then what will be= the=20 response to B ??
 
3)  If A is initiating the call and sending the suppor= ted=20 codec list say (1,2,3)
    
    A -->  INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3)= =20 --> B      ( B supports  4, 5,6)
    A <--  200 OK ( SDP -> what will b= e=20 here ??)  <-- B
  and what will be the d behaviour of A ....
[Mohammed=20 Noman Siddiqui] B would send 488 Not Acceptable=20 here 
  
4) Re-Negotiation -
 
   If A is initiating the call and sending the=20 supported codec list say (1,2,3)
    
    A -->  INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3)= =20 --> B      ( B supports 1 , 2, 3)
    A <--  200 OK ( SDP audio1, 2=20 ,3   <-- B
    A --> ACK --> B
 
( I guess the rtp will use codec 1)
[Mohammed=20 Noman Siddiqui] Yes, RTP will use codec 1, however both sid= es=20 should be able to dynamically switch the payload to either 2 and= =20 3 
 
  Now during the call say A wants to change the codec to 2,= will=20 it send the re-invite or SDP session has some provision for it( I jus= t=20 want to confirm, is it possible to change the codec without sending a= ny=20 SIP message)
[Mohammed Noman Siddiqui] Yes, dynamic = payload=20 switching based on the negotiated codecs list is permitted. Unfortuna= tely,=20 many devices do not support this and hence its better to do the=20 re-negotiation. 
 
PS: I know i have made a lengthy mail, but  it is very= much=20 required for me to understand some network behaviour and=20 implementation.
 
Regards
Atul
--_000_7B5D2E520D838A45838DE68F4030DC2D0444DB1983MCHP057Agloba_-- From pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu Wed Jul 13 10:01:47 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7E2F11E8144 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:01:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RIJUeNHJS0S4 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:01:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qmta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.59.228]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D362111E80BD for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omta24.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.76]) by qmta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 7Utc1h0021ei1Bg5FV1nuk; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:01:47 +0000 Received: from Paul-Kyzivats-MacBook-Pro.local ([24.62.109.41]) by omta24.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 7V1l1h00J0tdiYw3kV1mQK; Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:01:46 +0000 Message-ID: <4E1DCF77.2010806@alum.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 13:01:43 -0400 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sip@ietf.org References: <1310570980.43882.YahooMailClassic@web94802.mail.in2.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1310570980.43882.YahooMailClassic@web94802.mail.in2.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Sip] Codec Negotiation and renegotiataion X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:01:47 -0000 On 7/13/11 11:29 AM, atul garg wrote: > Hello All, > I have very basic question regarding the codec negotiation in SIP, I > will try to summarize my queries below - > 1) If A is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list say > (1,2,3) > A --> INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B ( B supports 1 , 3, 5) > A <-- 200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here 1, 2 ,3 OR 1, 3, 5) <-- B > if it is 1, 3, 5 then what will be the response to B ?? The answer could include 1; 1,3; 1,3,5; or I suppose 1,5; 3,5. A doesn't "respond" to B. If the answer contains both 1,3 then A could use either 1, 3, or both when sending to B, and B can use either 1, 3, or both when sending to A. So if B only wants to use one codec it would be well advised to only mention one in the answer. If B mentioned codec 5, it isn't really useful immediately. Its just an FYI for A. It could be treated as a hint, in case A does support 5 and just didn't mention it. > 2) If A is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list say > (1,2,3) > A --> INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B ( B supports 2 , 3, 5) > A <-- 200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here 2 , 3 OR 2 , 3, 5) <-- B > if it is 2 , 3 then what will be the response to B ?? > if it is 2 , 3, 5 then what will be the response to B ?? This isn't much different from (1). B could answer with any of the things you say. > 3) If A is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list say > (1,2,3) > A --> INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B ( B supports 4, 5,6) > A <-- 200 OK ( SDP -> what will be here ??) <-- B Typically B would respond with 488. If it wants, it could respond 200 and refuse the media stream (port 0). That is probably not a good idea unless it has further plans - e.g. to make another offer of some sort. > and what will be the d behaviour of A .... If the response is 488, A gives up. If response is 200 with refused media, it might want to wait and see what happens next. Or else it might as well send a BYE. > 4) Re-Negotiation - > If A is initiating the call and sending the supported codec list say (1,2,3) > A --> INVITE (SDP-> audio 1 2 3) --> B ( B supports 1 , 2, 3) > A <-- 200 OK ( SDP audio1, 2 ,3 <-- B > A --> ACK --> B > ( I guess the rtp will use codec 1) rtp could be 1, 2, 3, or a combination. > Now during the call say A wants to change the codec to 2, will it send > the re-invite or SDP session has some provision for it( I just want to > confirm, is it possible to change the codec without sending any SIP message) > PS: I know i have made a lengthy mail, but it is very much required for > me to understand some network behaviour and implementation. If 1,2,3 negotiated, it can just start using 2. But I think this will break a number of implementations that make unjustified assumptions. I know there are big vendors with products that can only support one codec and must renegotiate to switch, and assume the first one in the answer is the one to be used. So you would be well advised to send a new offer with just 2 if that is the one you want to use. Thanks, Paul > Regards > Atul > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business. > Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on how to develop a SIP implementation. > Use dispatch@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip. > Use sipcore@ietf.org for issues related to maintenance of the core SIP specifications. From dean.willis@softarmor.com Fri Jul 15 10:35:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1E4721F8B9C for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:35:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.299 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_43=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hr1rETdppKlx for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:35:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65CE221F8BA3 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:35:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gyd5 with SMTP id 5so709462gyd.31 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:35:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.147.163.16 with SMTP id q16mr3535691yao.19.1310751336922; Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.143] (cpe-66-25-15-110.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.15.110]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j65sm1316925yhm.82.2011.07.15.10.35.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:35:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Dean Willis Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 12:35:34 -0500 To: sip@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) Subject: [Sip] Test, please ignore X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 17:35:42 -0000 I seem to be having a problem with the mail replicator scrambling those = messages that mail.app insists on sending with a content-encoding of = quoted printable. Supposedly, the apple mail from 10.6.2+ does this = whenever it is forced to deal with "long lines" but the message format = is set to "plain text". I am wondering if I should just switch to mhtml = format? Would this be likely to work better? Or shouldI just go to = theunderbird? I do enjoy the addressbook integration in mail.app, = however. -- Dea, the bemused= From decruzreuben@gmail.com Wed Jul 27 04:24:23 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D058E21F8BBD for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:24:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.489 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.109, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1JYCZf6GGpsN for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:24:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ew0-f44.google.com (mail-ew0-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1648321F8BBB for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:24:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ewy19 with SMTP id 19so1358262ewy.31 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:24:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=LuV5p4x4BMf0W8YtQ+1ye+inWLe4nC+WYe4JA2BVt10=; b=D85s5DAa1+mObJkv6Tz5wRJSWEsUNGb76DujERIEAy5d/yM7i5OSM89QRk6qTbpZQO qIpi6o/5cYTV3EQRoBAXwxwqSRxJ6RpOV1bB1IPh/DmgqZJ5eAuPwIM8zr5/3LhmthcR 0xuv2ySXSSKVuZx5k0HP+MzKHs8WkSrO8kV0Q= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.42.12 with SMTP id i12mr2769376eeb.72.1311765862208; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:24:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.95.11 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:24:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 16:54:22 +0530 Message-ID: From: Ruben Roque To: sip@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015175cdc543ed46604a90b4a27 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 05:46:41 -0700 Subject: [Sip] Types of Conference calls supported by SIP X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 11:26:28 -0000 --0015175cdc543ed46604a90b4a27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I want to learn the types of conference calls supported by SIP along with the working and call flow. Kindly provide me the links/RFC's for the same. Thank you! Regards, Reuben --0015175cdc543ed46604a90b4a27 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
=A0
I want to learn the types of conference calls=A0supported by SIP along= with=A0the working and call flow.
Kindly provide me the links/RFC's for the same.
=A0
Thank you!
=A0
Regards,
Reuben
--0015175cdc543ed46604a90b4a27-- From mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com Wed Jul 27 06:09:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sip@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7452721F8B81 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 06:09:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.431 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.431 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SmN8q4sIgD-U for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 06:09:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21E3521F8538 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 06:09:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vxi40 with SMTP id 40so1420941vxi.31 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 06:09:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=SQ8PYBGQXsPCOvctiGAzf/UvQ8YRDul1xHh4Ep+PnEE=; b=rP5t3+fCr/kwdo8Pv4FYW4NUkBT2Vctg5aWT6pbk/bmjbmJZpQbrYNYmuYilpYt5eE QmA5tO26x1dsnDlKeBB19sU8/evqoE9thfu0sMBx3s70dDoFVsUp/xaXOXzmCEt/SfVv UFQJANM+1K5IyGWkCw/z0IksVdakZpBZdmAUc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.28.48 with SMTP id y16mr17562vdg.384.1311772172602; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 06:09:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.167.34 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 06:09:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 08:09:32 -0500 Message-ID: From: Mary Barnes To: Ruben Roque Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307c9e705fcdcb04a90cc204 Cc: sip@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Sip] Types of Conference calls supported by SIP X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 13:09:46 -0000 --20cf307c9e705fcdcb04a90cc204 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 RFCs 4245, 4353, 4575 and 4579 describe SIP based conferencing. They were developed in the SIPPING WG. You might also want to look at the work in the XCON WG: http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/xcon/ Regards, Mary. On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Ruben Roque wrote: > Hi, > > I want to learn the types of conference calls supported by SIP along > with the working and call flow. > Kindly provide me the links/RFC's for the same. > > Thank you! > > Regards, > Reuben > > _______________________________________________ > Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip > This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business. > Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on how to develop a SIP > implementation. > Use dispatch@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip. > Use sipcore@ietf.org for issues related to maintenance of the core SIP > specifications. > --20cf307c9e705fcdcb04a90cc204 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RFCs 4245, 4353, 4575 and 4579 describe SIP based conferencing. They were d= eveloped in the SIPPING WG.

You might also want to look = at the work in the XCON WG:

Regards,
Mary.

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Ruben Roque <decruzreuben@gmail.com>= wrote:
Hi,
=A0
I want to learn the types of conference calls=A0supported by SIP along= with=A0the working and call flow.
Kindly provide me the links/RFC's for the same.
=A0
Thank you!
=A0
Regards,
Reuben

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list =A0https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is essentially closed and only used for finishing old business. Use sip-implementors@cs= .columbia.edu for questions on how to develop a SIP implementation.
Use dispatch@ietf.org for new deve= lopments on the application of sip.
Use sipcore@ietf.org for issues rel= ated to maintenance of the core SIP specifications.
<= br>
--20cf307c9e705fcdcb04a90cc204--