[SIPForum-discussion] No Ring Back Tone Issue

[Raghavendra]

Hi,

As per my knowledge, 183 session progress is for resource reservation not
for Ring Back Tone. Means, after receipt of INVITE message UE will send 183
response indicating that session establishment procedures have been started(
means resource reservation), but user has not been informed. 

 

Please let me know if any wrong, 

Thank you

 

 

  _____  

From: discussion-bounces at sipforum.org
[mailto:discussion-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of ramon nolasco
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 9:24 AM
To: discussion at sipforum.org
Subject: [SIPForum-discussion] No Ring Back Tone Issue

 

Hi All,

 

Greetings and a good day to all of you! I have this and quite a rare one to
me of "no ring back tone" problem with one of our interconnecting partners.
Partner claims that our system normally sends "183 Session Progress" and
"180 Ringing". That we are sending "183 Session Progress" without the
ringtone data though our "180 Ringing" has a ringtone data. That their
system looks for the ringtone data to process from the first received
message response, which is our "183 Session Progress" and afterward
disregards our "180 Ringing" response that followed, wherein the ringtone
data is indeed present,  thus resulting to a successfull call but without
ringback tone. 

 

My questions are, per standard:

1.	When and why does "183 Session Progress" is being sent as a
response?
2.	Should "183 Session Progress" sometimes also can replace "180
Ringing", thus have the ringtone data? or
3.	or it's always "180 Ringing" that has the ringtone data?
4.	Our setup is SBC-to-SBC, Huawei Eudemon 2300-to-Mediaring
Voizbridge, is it us who really has the problem or who needs then to adjust?
Adjust what?
5.	Is my partner's claim of "the should be system flow and process"
standard?

Appreciate any of your solution advice and many thanks in advance :)

 

Best regards,

 

Mon

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20080827/6c2a04a6/attachment-0002.html>