Then you mean, for instance, that if an endpoint A offers a payload of type iLBC/16000/1 with an id value of 102 and an endpoint B responds offering the same payload but with an id of 109 this should be considered as a violation? There's no way possible of establishing an id equivalence or translation between both endpoints? As far as i know iLBC has a dynamic payload type and there should exist some kind of mechanism to set a bridge between ids. Isn't right? Thanks. Regards. On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Benny Prijono <bennylp at teluu.com> wrote: > 2011/10/25 Miguel ?ngel <miguelangel at yuilop.com>: > > Hi all. > > > > Considering a case in which the session initiator negotiates a dynamic > payload and the receiver answers with the same payload but with a different > identifier value, what is the proper function to modify the payload id on > the initiator? Thanks in advance. > > > > That violates SDP negotiation rule, and the best way for caller is to > disconnect the call IMO. > > Benny > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.pjsip.org/pipermail/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org/attachments/20111026/1261c26f/attachment.html>
