[SIPForum-discussion] Unexpected 481 Message

[shiba shankar rout]

Hi Moshe,


In the ACK
  From: [field0] <sip:[field0]@[field1]:[local_port]>;tag=[call_number]
  To: <sip:[field2]@[field3]:[remote_port]>[peer_tag_param]

As  same guy sending UPDATE request.

Here you forget to send  To Tag in the request .

  From: <sip:[field0]@[field1]:[local_port]>;tag=[call_number]
  To: <sip:[field2]@[field3]:[remote_port]>

Add To-Tag .i.e add [peer_tag_param].  It will work definitely.


Thanks,
S S Rout

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Moshe Ostrovsky <mosheo at radvision.com>wrote:

>  Hi.
>
>
>
> Add “to tag” to the update request.
>
>
>
> I hope it will help.
>
>
>
> *From:* discussion-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:
> discussion-bounces at sipforum.org] *On Behalf Of *olgun kaya
> *Sent:* Friday, August 14, 2009 10:17 AM
> *To:* discussion at sipforum.org
> *Subject:* [SIPForum-discussion] Unexpected 481 Message
>
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to create a scenario that originator sends a 501 to INFO then
> the same originator sends UPDATE message for long call update. Bu I don't
> know why after UPDATE message session manager rejects the call with 481 Call
> leg does not exist. I am using a SIPp script to simulate this behavior.
> Please see the attached xml file. could someone help me that why the 481 is
> being responded back to my UPDATE.
>
> thank you very much.
>
> --
>
> Samuel Goldwyn<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/s/samuel_goldwyn.html> - "I'm willing to admit that I may not always be right, but I am never
> wrong."
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20090815/8ff9c080/attachment-0002.html>