[SIPForum-discussion] Should session version in "o=" line be same for 180 ringing and 200 ok message?

[Stephen James]

Are you providing early media after the 180, but before the 200? If not, then 
don't send SDP in the 180.
Then possibly it is the a:sendonly, a:sendrcv that is changing on answer?


 
Stephen James 
sjames_1958 at yahoo.com
 
We are not princes of the earth, we are the descendants of worms, and any 
nobility must be earned.





________________________________
From: sid <sid77sharma77 at gmail.com>
To: Kovács György <gykovacs.datanet at gmail.com>
Cc: "discussion at sipforum.org" <discussion at sipforum.org>
Sent: Thu, May 16, 2013 9:30:58 AM
Subject: Re: [SIPForum-discussion] Should session version in "o=" line be same 
for 180 ringing and 200 ok message?


Hi,
Yes, both 180 riniging and 200 ok carries sdp information. but I did not find 
any change.

Sent from my iPod

On 15-May-2013, at 9:49 PM, Kovács György <gykovacs.datanet at gmail.com> wrote:


If the SDP has changed the version number in origin line must be incremented, it 
is normal behavior. 

>Are you sending 200 OK with SDP? Is there any difference between the 180 Ringing 
>SDP and the 200 OK SDP?
>Maybe the problem is with the SDP (probably there were different codec 
>settings?), not the origin line itself.
>
>
>-- 
>Kovács György  
>On Wed, 2013-05-15 at 13:08 +0530, siddharth sharma wrote: 
>
>Hi Guys,
>> 
>>I have one scenario, where my carrier is complaining that their calls are 
>>getting disconnected after few milliseconds.
>>According to their analysis, they are saying that session version in "o=" line  
>>is not same as in 180 ringing and 200 Ok message.
>>Because of this, they are sending BYE message.
>> 
>>Is this valid reason?
>> 
>>I have checked message, I have not found any difference. 
>>_______________________________________________ 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/20130516/f00a69c5/attachment-0002.html>