[SIPForum-discussion] Difference Re invite & Re attampt in SIP

Nitin Kapoor nitinkapoorr at gmail.com
Tue Jun 15 11:58:46 UTC 2010


Rajesh,



Essentially both are the different things, and also using with different
mechanism.



Ideally whatever the modification is involve changing addresses or ports,
adding a media stream, deleting a media stream, and so on. This is
accomplished by sending a new INVITE request within the same dialog that
established the session. An INVITE request sent within an existing dialog is
known as a re-INVITE.

Note:  that a single re-INVITE can modify the dialog and the parameters of
the session at the same time.





Now If we say about the re-attempt, which may be used by for totally
different purpose. Like in REGISTER method.



For ex:  If because of any reason transaction layer return a timeout
error(408), because your register did not get any response, at that time
your UAC should **RE-ATTEMPT** to register the device again but it should
not be immediately(beucase the immediate **re-attempt** is likely to also
timeout).



Also here is the another use of **re-attempt** of in IMG



When a call is attempted to an “unreachable” gateway, the IMG will
automatically trigger the **re-attempt** logic if the gateway is part of a
route list.



Now I might be wrong too in  **re-attempt** scenario. Please wait for the
others opinion as well.



Thanks,

Nitin Kapoor


On 15 June 2010 00:51, Rajesh Paswan <rajesh.paswan at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
>
> Could you please clear me differece between Re invite & Re attampt in SIP,
> with SIP responce code.
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> Rajesh Paswan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100615/92d4639e/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the discussion mailing list