[SIPForum-discussion] issue of the VoIP for the point-of-sale terminals

Joey ZHENG joey.zheng at sagemcom.com
Tue Jan 22 03:48:21 UTC 2013


Hi All,

Now we got a problem:
The test setup:
POS payment terminal----->Gateway<---------->Internet<---->party B
Once B received the invite, it will send the RTP packets immediately to 
Gateway.
And it cause the problem that: 
Gateway didn't receive the SDP in 200 or 180 to know the RTP information, 
then early RTP packets to the gateway are dropped, not transferred to the 
POS terminal.
But there are some handshake signal in these early RTP packets, like 
2100Hz CED. And since POS didn't receive the CED signal, the handshake 
between POS terminal and the party B always failed. 

Is there anyone who got the same problem, and what's the best solution for 
this? Is there any way to notify the party B to delay the RTP stream by 
the SIP message?

BRS,

Joey
 
#
" Ce courriel et les documents qui lui sont joints peuvent contenir des
informations confidentielles ou ayant un caractère privé. S'ils ne vous sont
pas destinés, nous vous signalons qu'il est strictement interdit de les
divulguer, de les reproduire ou d'en utiliser de quelque manière que ce
soit le contenu. Si ce message vous a été transmis par erreur, merci d'en
informer l'expéditeur et de supprimer immédiatement de votre système
informatique ce courriel ainsi que tous les documents qui y sont attachés."


                               ******

" This e-mail and any attached documents may contain confidential or
proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
notified that any dissemination, copying of this e-mail and any attachments
thereto or use of their contents by any means whatsoever is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please advise the
sender immediately and delete this e-mail and all attached documents
from your computer system."
#

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20130122/5c27fe13/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the discussion mailing list