[SIPForum-discussion] Polycom on TCP

NISHIKANT PRADHAN nishikant.pradhan at gmail.com
Thu Nov 17 09:13:31 UTC 2011


Hi Naresh,

I did verify but could not reproduce problem described by you.

Phone Information
Phone Model SoundPoint IP 650
SIP Software Version 3.3.1.0933
BootROM Software Version 4.3.0.0246

SIP Messages were on TCP (Transport TCPOnly)

PFA Wireshark Capture


Regards,

Nishikant Pradhan

"Life's battles don't always go to the stronger or faster man. But sooner
or later the man who wins, is the man who thinks he can."  --  Vince
Lombardi


On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Naresh Ramaswamy
<inform.naresh at gmail.com>wrote:

> It is an observation over Polycom650 and Polycom6000 soundstation SIP IP
> phones:
> Phones are configured to use TCP Only, while I make the call the INVITE is
> on TCP and followed with my server responding (as configured to use) on
> TCP, following to which the Polycom phone sends ACK and corresponding other
> requests (such as in-dialog re-INVITE or BYE) sent over UDP.
>     Strange to have this observation!
>     Is this valid or am I missing here something?
>     Have anyone experienced the same?
> I am trying with other TCP phones from SNOM, Linksys and few other IAD's
> and not finding this observation!
>
> Kindly suggest if there are any known issues with Polycom phones.
>
> regards,
> Naresh
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20111117/278fd668/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PolycomSoundPointIP650.pcap
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 14477 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20111117/278fd668/attachment-0002.obj>


More information about the discussion mailing list