<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>Hi,</div><div><br></div><div>Doing some more digging, shouldn't this type of INVITE be fixed already?</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://trac.pjsip.org/repos/ticket/339">http://trac.pjsip.org/repos/ticket/339</a></div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://osdir.com/ml/voip.pjsip/2007-06/msg00194.html">http://osdir.com/ml/voip.pjsip/2007-06/msg00194.html</a></div><div><br></div><div><br><br>Malcolm Caldwell</div><div><br>On 30/04/2010, at 18:04, "Adrian Georgescu" <<a href="mailto:ag@ag-projects.com">ag@ag-projects.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<p><tt><font size="2">Well what I believe is less relevant.<br>
<br>
To see your problem solved you must see that:<br>
<br>
1. Is supported in PJSIP<br>
2. Is supported in SIP SIMPLE client SDK<br>
<br>
PJSIP does accept patches and we do too, but I remember having a <br>
similar discussion long time ago that ended up in the same place. The <br>
chance of implementing this functionality in PJSIP is very low unless <br>
some external party provides a patch and maintains it.<br>
<br>
Adrian<br>
<br>
On Apr 30, 2010, at 10:18 AM, Malcolm Caldwell wrote:<br>
<br>
> Adrian,<br>
><br>
> I really thing you are attributing a motive to the vendor which is <br>
> unlikely.<br>
><br>
> I would be highly surprised if the vendor had decided to do this <br>
> type of<br>
> INVITE just to limit which phones work with their PBX.<br>
><br>
><br>
>> From: Adrian Georgescu <<a href="mailto:ag@ag-projects.com">ag@ag-projects.com</a>><br>
>> Reply-To: <<a href="mailto:blink@lists.ag-projects.com">blink@lists.ag-projects.com</a>><br>
>> Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:08:37 +0200<br>
>> To: Emil Ivov <<a href="mailto:emcho@sip-communicator.org">emcho@sip-communicator.org</a>><br>
>> Cc: <<a href="mailto:blink@lists.ag-projects.com">blink@lists.ag-projects.com</a>><br>
>> Subject: Re: [Blink] Digest user<br>
>><br>
>> Hi Emil,<br>
><br>
> Indeed, that INVITE is valid RFC wise. But think about it more in a<br>
>><br>
> wider context. This behaviour expects the other end-points to do what<br>
> is<br>
>> described (and convoluted) but in practice this does not happen<br>
> with the<br>
>> majority of the SIP User Agents in the Internet world, Blink<br>
> included in<br>
>> this case, that do negotiate the SDP starting with the<br>
> first invite and not<br>
>> later.<br>
><br>
> While having SDP in the original INVITE will work with any User Agent<br>
>><br>
> on the planet, the opposite is not true, so this behaviour should be<br>
>><br>
> avoided because it leads inexorably to interoperability issues.<br>
><br>
> Being RFC<br>
>> correct does not also mean is also a clever thing to do<br>
> unless you are a<br>
>> proprietary vendor that sale both the PBX and the<br>
> phones like Cisco in this<br>
>> case. Most of the proprietary vendors do<br>
> exactly this, they use the<br>
>> standards in their own tweaked way in order<br>
> to sell more devices that<br>
>> complies with their solution and they do not<br>
> care for generic<br>
>> interoperability with other implementations. Is<br>
> actually a selling point for<br>
>> them to do this.<br>
><br>
> The actual technical reason is that PJSIP stack requires the<br>
>> presence<br>
> of an SDP in the original Invite and I do not blame them for this<br>
>><br>
> design, It makes not sense for me to have INVITE with media<br>
> description<br>
>> either.<br>
><br>
> In this case Blink will not work but it explicitly rejects the call<br>
>><br>
> with 488, which is also correct because it was designed to required<br>
> SDP in<br>
>> the first INVITE.<br>
><br>
> Adrian<br>
><br>
> On Apr 30, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Emil Ivov wrote:<br>
><br>
>><br>
>> Hey folks,<br>
>><br>
>> (inline)<br>
>><br>
>> На 30.04.10 08:47, Adrian Georgescu написа:<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>> On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:51 AM, Malcolm Caldwell wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>>> Hi Adrian,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>> I now have the log from my work, although the packets are not the<br>
>>>><br>
>> same<br>
>>>> as I say yesterday. (I wish I had saved them). However, calls<br>
>> are<br>
>>>> not working, and this trace shows that:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> RECEIVED: Packet 19,<br>
>> +0:03:05.878643<br>
>>>> 2010-04-30 09:01:52.947054: SIP.SERVER.IP.ADDR:5060 -(SIP<br>
>> over<br>
>>>> UDP)-><br>
>>>> MY.MAC.IP.ADDR:59181<br>
>>>> *INVITE<br>
>> sip:fcuzryxa@MY.MAC.IP.ADDR:59181 SIP/2.0<br>
>>>> *Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 23:31:54<br>
>> GMT<br>
>>>> Allow: INVITE, OPTIONS, INFO, BYE, CANCEL, ACK, PRACK, UPDATE,<br>
>>>><br>
>> REFER,<br>
>>>> SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY<br>
>>>> From:<br>
>>>><br>
>> <sip:YYYY@SIP.SERVER.IP.ADDR>;tag=94d7ad56-fdc6-40a9-<br>
>>>><br>
>> bd8e-772b8995b8b6-47099214<br>
>>>> Allow-Events: presence<br>
>>>> Supported:<br>
>> timer,resource-priority,replaces<br>
>>>> Min-SE: 1800<br>
>>>> Remote-Party-ID:<br>
>>>><br>
>> <sip:YYYY@138.80.6.4;x-cisco-callback-<br>
>>>><br>
>> number=YYYY>;party=calling;screen=yes;privacy=off<br>
>>>> Content-Length: 0<br>
>>>><br>
>> User-Agent: Cisco-CUCM7.0<br>
>>>> To: <sip:XXXX@MY.MAC.IP.ADDR><br>
>>>> Contact:<br>
>> <sip:YYYY@SIP.SERVER.IP.ADDR:5060>;video;audio<br>
>>>> Expires: 180<br>
>>>> Call-ID:<br>
>> <a href="mailto:63b1d680-bda116ea-b7-406508a@SIP.SERVER.IP.ADDR"><a href="mailto:63b1d680-bda116ea-b7-406508a@SIP.SERVER.IP.ADDR">63b1d680-bda116ea-b7-406508a@SIP.SERVER.IP.ADDR</a></a><br>
>>>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP<br>
>> SIP.SERVER.IP.ADDR:5060;branch=z9hG4bKc721379491<br>
>>>> CSeq: 101 INVITE<br>
>>>><br>
>> Send-Info: conference<br>
>>>> Max-Forwards: 70<br>
>>>> Alert-Info:<br>
>> <<a href="file://Bellcore-dr1/">file://Bellcore-dr1/</a>><br>
>>><br>
>>> There is no SDP with any type of supported media<br>
>> in this Invite.<br>
>>><br>
>>> You are using Blink against a non-standard compliant<br>
>> corporate PBX<br>
>>> solution that works only with approved phone devices by<br>
>> Cisco.<br>
>>><br>
>>> What do you want to see happening except rejecting it?<br>
>><br>
>> It's<br>
>> probably worth noting that 3261 does authorize empty INVITEs. In<br>
>> such cases<br>
>> you simply need to send an offer in the OK, and get the<br>
>> answer in the<br>
>> ACK.<br>
>><br>
>> From 3261, 13.2.1:<br>
>><br>
>> The initial offer MUST be in either an<br>
>> INVITE or, if not<br>
>> there,<br>
>> in the first reliable non-failure<br>
>> message from the UAS back to<br>
>> the UAC. In this specification, that<br>
>> is the final 2xx<br>
>> response.<br>
>><br>
>> and then:<br>
>><br>
>> If the initial<br>
>> offer is in the first reliable non-failure<br>
>> message from the UAS back<br>
>> to UAC, the answer MUST be in the<br>
>> acknowledgement for that message<br>
>> (in this specification, ACK<br>
>> for a 2xx response).<br>
>><br>
>> Here's the<br>
>> whole thing (starting at the bottom):<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3261#page-79"><a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3261#page-79">http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3261#page-79</a></a><br>
>><br>
>> Cheers,<br>
>> Emil<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>> Adrian<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> Blink<br>
>> mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:Blink@lists.ag-projects.com"><a href="mailto:Blink@lists.ag-projects.com">Blink@lists.ag-projects.com</a></a><br>
>>><br>
>> <a href="http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo/blink"><a href="http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo/blink">http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo/blink</a></a><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> Emil Ivov, Ph.D.<br>
>> 67000 Strasbourg,<br>
>> Project Lead France<br>
>><br>
>> SIP Communicator<br>
>> <a href="mailto:emcho@sip-communicator.org">emcho@sip-communicator.org</a> PHONE:<br>
>><br>
>> +33.1.77.62.43.30<br>
>> <a href="http://sip-communicator.org"><a href="http://sip-communicator.org">http://sip-communicator.org</a></a> FAX:<br>
>><br>
>> +33.1.77.62.47.31<br>
>><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Blink<br>
>> mailing<br>
>> list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Blink@lists.ag-projects.com"><a href="mailto:Blink@lists.ag-projects.com">Blink@lists.ag-projects.com</a></a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo"><a href="http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo">http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo</a></a><br>
>> /blink<br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Blink mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Blink@lists.ag-projects.com"><a href="mailto:Blink@lists.ag-projects.com">Blink@lists.ag-projects.com</a></a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo/blink"><a href="http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo/blink">http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo/blink</a></a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Blink mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Blink@lists.ag-projects.com"><a href="mailto:Blink@lists.ag-projects.com">Blink@lists.ag-projects.com</a></a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo/blink"><a href="http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo/blink">http://lists.ag-projects.com/mailman/listinfo/blink</a></a><br>
</font></tt>
</p>
</div></blockquote></body></html>