bugs in inv_respond_incoming_update

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Matt,

Thanks for the report. We fixed this in #1596
(https://trac.pjsip.org/repos/ticket/1596).

Regards,
Ming

On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Matt DiMeo <mattdimeo at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Two bugs in inv_respond_incoming_update:
>
> 1. A comment says "Send 500 with Retry-After header set randomly between 0
> and 10 if we receive UPDATE while we haven't sent answer."  This doesn't
> actually happen, though; there's no provision for setting a Retry-After in
> the following code.
>
> 2. I think the "If UPDATE doesn't contain SDP" test should be checked before
> the "Send 500 if" test.  I ran into a problem where:
>
> Phone A calls Phone B
> Phone B starts an assisted transfer call to phone C (pjsip)
> While phone C is ringing, Phone B hits the transfer again to make it into a
> blind transfer.
> Asterisk sends an UPDATE to phone C containing new caller id information
> (P-Asserted-Identity IIRC).
> Phone C sends a 500 response, and asterisk gives up on phone C.
>
> The "Send 500 if" test only makes sense in an SDP negotiation situation, so
> it should be after the if-no-sdp.
>
> Fixing the missing Retry-After header may or may not solve this particular
> situation, depending how asterisk works.  But I think swapping the order and
> also adding the retry is the right thing.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>



[Index of Archives]     [Asterisk Users]     [Asterisk App Development]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [Linux API]
  Powered by Linux