Gang Liu schrieb: > What you said is only will happen when call forked. > But from SIP message above, call not forked. > This isn't asymmetric codecs case. > The UAS created two different SDP answer for one offer. orig line is > different. Yes, that is true. But as a dirty workaround, if the GW wants to change SDP between 183 and 200 it could use a new totag in the 200 ok. regards klaus > > regards, > Gang > > On 4/23/09, *Klaus Darilion* <klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at > <mailto:klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at>> wrote: > > Hi gang! > > Gang Liu schrieb: > > This provider's SDP answer isn't correct. > For SDP, it should be only one answer for an offer. > If offer in invite, answer must be first reliable response, > which is only 2xx in RFC 3261, extended in other RFCs. > If answer in provisional response, then need repeated in the 200. > > > I wonder if it would be standard conform if the 200 OK uses a > different to-tag (as then it would be a different dialog). > > regards > klaus > > > regards, > Gang > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Alexei Kuznetsov > <eofster at gmail.com <mailto:eofster at gmail.com> > <mailto:eofster at gmail.com <mailto:eofster at gmail.com>>> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Michael Bradley Jr > <mbradley.jr at gmail.com <mailto:mbradley.jr at gmail.com> > <mailto:mbradley.jr at gmail.com <mailto:mbradley.jr at gmail.com>>> > wrote: > >> I've noticed a one-way audio problem with one of the SIP > providers. It's > >> definitely a media issue, not a network issue. I make a call, > another > >> party answers and hears me, but I can't her another > party. When > he or > >> she starts speaking, the output on my side says > >> > > > > can you please name one of those providers? > > In my case it is the Russian provider pctel.ru > <http://pctel.ru> <http://pctel.ru/>. > > Alexei > > _______________________________________________ > Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org <http://blog.pjsip.org/> > > pjsip mailing list > pjsip at lists.pjsip.org <mailto:pjsip at lists.pjsip.org> > <mailto:pjsip at lists.pjsip.org <mailto:pjsip at lists.pjsip.org>> > http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org > > pjsip mailing list > pjsip at lists.pjsip.org <mailto:pjsip at lists.pjsip.org> > http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org > > pjsip mailing list > pjsip at lists.pjsip.org <mailto:pjsip at lists.pjsip.org> > http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org > > pjsip mailing list > pjsip at lists.pjsip.org > http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org
