23 May
2005
23 May
'05
10:44 a.m.
Hi Franz,
Thank for response me. The situation is more clear now.
Jorge
----- Original Message -----
From: "Franz Edler" <franz.edler(a)ycn.com>
To: "'Jorge Crichigno'" <jcrichigno(a)conexion.com.py>py>;
<serusers(a)lists.iptel.org>rg>;
<serdev(a)lists.iptel.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 3:49 PM
Subject: RE: [Serdev] session Timers
From: Jorge Crichigno Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 5:39
AM
What I saw was that, in the second Invite, the
addpac sends the Invite
with the the "to tag" that was attached by SER before (422 response). I
belive that this is the reason of the 481 response from grandstream. I
think it is a bug of Addpac. Is that correct?
Yes. It is correct.
A To-tag MUST NOT be attached by the UAC outside of a dialog and a dialog
does not exist, because a failure response (422) does not create a dialog.
Franz