[SIPForum-discussion] To-tag Change

Robert Sparks rjsparks at nostrum.com
Fri Feb 8 17:38:16 UTC 2008

You can see a 200 with a different to-tag than you saw in the 180 in  
the real world.
Its not that the thing emitting the responses changed the tags - its  
that different things emitted the responses.

If the request forked somewhere downstream from you, you could have  
one branch of the fork return a 180
and the other return a 200, leading to what you're seeing.


On Feb 8, 2008, at 11:12 AM, BIENVENIDO A 007MUNDO wrote:

> Hi,
> Do you think that is possible to change "To-tag" field in a 200ok  
> message after receiving 18X message with to-tag?
> The references aren't clear neither RFC3261 nor drafts (for example  
> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-sipping-service-examples-13.txt).
> In draft example 2.9 (call forwarding - no answer "sequential  
> forking"), "To-tag" F5 message (180) is different than "To-tag" in  
> F13 message (200ok), otherwise in RFC3261 the session is  
> established with unique ID, this ID is composed of "From-tag",  
> "Call-Id" and "To-tag".
> My Switch doesn't accept 200ok with different "To-tag" if  
> previously has received a 180 message.
> Can someone clarify this issue please?
>  Thanks,
> José.
> _______________________________________________
> This is the SIP Forum discussion mailing list
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE, or edit your delivery options, please visit http:// 
> sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
> Post to the list at discussion at sipforum.org

More information about the discussion mailing list