[SIPForum-discussion] Is the preference codec 0 ?

[vijay kant gupta]

ya even 200 ok is a final and positive response for re invite, and in 200 ok
tell the bparty supported parameter, if there is a problem then uas send
unsupported codec  or some error. so here transaction is sucessfull and the
new rtp use 0 law. so be ensure that rtp has 0 g711u law.

On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:50 PM, liuhaisheng <lhs_1979 at 163.com> wrote:

>  Nora
>   In fact the codec used is the result of nagotiation. According to the
> message, they have nagotiated successfully. Both have the PCMU codec.
>
>
>
>
> 在2008-08-27，"Stewart Bunce" <Stewart.Bunce at telsis.com> 写道：
>
>  Nora,
>
> The 200 OK from User B would seem to indicate that the re-INVITE from User
> A was sucessfull, meaning that the media was correctly re-negotiated (if it
> had failed I would have expected a 488 response). In practical terms this
> means that PCMU would be used in both directions for the RTP as it is the
> only common codec present.
> .
> Stew
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* discussion-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:
> discussion-bounces at sipforum.org]*On Behalf Of *chen.yu26 at yahoo.com.cn
> *Sent:* 27 August 2008 10:54
> *To:* group SIP
> *Subject:* [SIPForum-discussion] Is the preference codec 0 ?
>
> Hi All,
> there is a call flow of modifying session between two different softswitch:
> User A           User B
> |  RTP Established   |
> |<=============>|
>                    |  INVITE [SDP]       |  the offer SDP m= audio 9256
> RTP/ATP 8 0 97
>                    |------------------------>|
>                    |             100               |
>                    |<------------------------|
>                    |                                   |
>                    |       200 [SDP]          |  the answer SDP m= audio
> 10054 RTP/AVP 0
>                    |<------------------------|
>                    |            ACK             |
>                    |------------------------>|
>
> Well, according to RFC3264, the preference codec should be present at
> first. So, the User A would like to choose PT=8 (PCMA), while the User B
> just afford PT=0 (PCMU).
>
> MY QUESTION IS:  Did they modify the session sucessfully? and if so, is the
> audio codec they  had negotiated  PT=0 (PCMU) ?
>
>
> Thanks & Regards
>
> Nora
>
> ------------------------------
> 雅虎邮箱，您的终生邮箱！ <http://cn.mail.yahoo.com/>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> NOTICE & DISCLAIMER
>
> This email including attachments (this "Document") is confidential and may
> contain legally privileged information.  If you have received this Document
> in error please notify the sender immediately and delete this Document from
> your system without using, copying, disclosing or disseminating it or
> placing any reliance upon its contents.  We cannot accept liability for any
> breaches of confidence arising through use of this Document.
>
> The information contained in this Document is provided solely for
> information purposes on an "as is" basis without warranty of any kind,
> either express or implied, including without limitation any implied warranty
> of satisfactory or merchantable quality, fitness for a particular purpose or
> freedom from error or infringement.  The user relies on the information
> contained herein, and its accuracy or otherwise, entirely at their own risk.
>
> Any opinions expressed in this Document are those of the author and do not
> necessarily reflect the opinions of Telsis.  We will not accept
> responsibility for any commitments made by our employees outside the scope
> of our business.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> [广告] 买房不必东奔西走，上房老大，看"二手房"网上房展会<http://popme.163.com/link/003984_0909_8679.html>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20080918/d04967ee/attachment-0002.html>