[SIPForum-discussion] Route advance query

Huseyin ALTUN huseyin.altun at verscom.com
Mon Oct 27 16:13:15 UTC 2008


Ankit,

 

I am also using NexTone SBC. If there is an early media and if it passes
through, then NexTone will stop hunting (that is what they called) and
it will send the release code.

 

Thanks,

 

Huseyin

 

From: discussion-bounces at sipforum.org
[mailto:discussion-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of Ankit
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 2:57 PM
To: Mishra2, Abhishek (NSN - IN/Bangalore)
Cc: discussion at sipforum.org; discussion at sipforum.com
Subject: Re: [SIPForum-discussion] Route advance query

 

Hi Abhishek/Sandra,

I am using Stateful Proxy. Actually its a Nextone MSX Box. I am not
getting any 200 OK from my vendor side, as he is unable to terminate a
particular destination.

Problem is that he is sending the release code after 18X message. So
logically once OLC path gets established, SBC will not do route advance.
But i feel that in IP, although one way media path establishes after
18X, but it should wait till the release code to disconnect the call
without doing route advance.

Currently SBC is not doing route advance as its taking 18X message as
primary key.

Please share your thoughts.

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Ankit Kumar

2008/10/25 Mishra2, Abhishek (NSN - IN/Bangalore)
<abhishek.mishra2 at nsn.com>

Hi Ankit

 

 Till the call is successful (origin gets 200 OK) , the alternate route
should not be discarded.  As Sandra mentioned,18x can happen due to
hetrogeneous network. Tags are useful for such calls

 

Thanks & Regards

Abhishek

 

________________________________

From: discussion-bounces at sipforum.org
[mailto:discussion-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of ext Ankit
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 11:45 PM


To: Cirlincione, Sandra
Cc: discussion at sipforum.org; discussion at sipforum.com
Subject: Re: [SIPForum-discussion] Route advance query

 

Sandra,

Its a problem of a Voice call

Call flow is like:-

Clients GW<------->Our SBC<------->Vendor GW

Our SBC legs are:-

Leg1-- clients GW<----Our SBC
Leg2-- Our SBC<----Vendor GW

Call flow between Our SBC and Vendor GW is:-

Our SBC                                           Vendor GW
                     Invite.....>
                    <100 trying..........
                    <180/183..............
                    < 503 service unavailable----------------

As, you can see above that vendor is sending us 180 and then 503. So my
concern is that will my SBC do any route advance for my client for the
same Call-id, if my running vendor sends me error code like above?


-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Ankit Kumar

2008/10/24 Cirlincione, Sandra <sandra.cirlincione at boeing.com>

This sounds like you have an intermediate device that is providing the
18x response.  If that's the case, then the device that is providing the
18x response, should also be receiving the 503, and would then reroute
on its alternate path, not return the 503 back to the vendor.  The other
condition is that you may get one leg connectivity, with a one-way
conversation, without the other side terminating.

 

What we saw, was that we only received the 503 if the 18x could not
complete. If the 18x completed, but the call could still not be
connected, then we saw a 200 Ok message, but the call was not connected,
and we received a fast busy on the caller side.

 

Are you doing voice only, or a mix of other media?

 

Sandra.Cirlincione @boeing.com 
SSG - IT, Enterprise Voice Engineering, VoIP/Convergence 
MOC pilot 425.865.3214    (One number reach) 

Home Office 425.373.8293 
Desk  206.766.5888
Cell 425.417.3138 
Wishing you happiness, hope, or health, take what you need. 

 

From: Ankit [mailto:erankitkumar at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 10:01 AM
To: Cirlincione, Sandra
Cc: discussion at sipforum.org; discussion at sipforum.com 


Subject: Re: [SIPForum-discussion] Route advance query

 

Sandra,

I appreciate your response.

As per the response code, it should definitely do route advance. But my
concern is that will it do route advace, if my vendor sends me the
release code after 18X......not after 100 trying message.

Concern is that once 18X is being sent from my vendor side, it indicates
that OLC has been established / or Media path has been established. So
will route advance works, if media path has already been established on
the current vendor?

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Ankit Kumar

2008/10/24 Cirlincione, Sandra <sandra.cirlincione at boeing.com>

Ankit,

 

Experience over the last few days with this, would indicate that it will
advance if you have something in your configuration to force the next
route.

 

A 503 error seems to indicate that the service is not reachable,
unavailable, or cannot complete.  It basically looks like an
"unsuccessful" call attempt which tells your system that the route
you've chosen was not successful.  That reply allows the routing device
to try the next preference route.

 

 

Sandra.Cirlincione @boeing.com 
SSG - IT, Enterprise Voice Engineering, VoIP/Convergence 
MOC pilot 425.865.3214    (One number reach) 

Home Office 425.373.8293 
Desk  206.766.5888
Cell 425.417.3138 
Wishing you happiness, hope, or health, take what you need. 

 

From: discussion-bounces at sipforum.org
[mailto:discussion-bounces at sipforum.org] On Behalf Of Ankit
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 2:49 AM
To: discussion at sipforum.com
Subject: Re: [SIPForum-discussion] Route advance query

 

Can somebody help me out?

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Ankit Kumar

2008/10/24 Ankit <erankitkumar at gmail.com>

Hi Folks,

I need one suggestion on a query. Scenario is:-

Lets say we have 2 backup vendor on routing. Will the GW or Switch or
SBC do route advance if he gets error (lets say 503 or 34 in ISDN) from
his previous vendor after 18X message?

Ex:-

Invite.....>
<100 trying..........
<180/183..............
< 503 service unavailable----------------

If yes, then why so and if no, why no?

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Ankit Kumar





















-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20081027/7c6c8836/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the discussion mailing list