3 Dec
2003
3 Dec
'03
6:56 p.m.
Hello,
As far as I know nobody is working on it and there is no other field but
Remote-Party-ID that can be used. Unfortunately we couldn't provide a
fix for every shortcoming in SIP user agents, so the options are:
1) Ask grandstream for rpid support
2) Use a B2BUA that can change From (but that's ugly).
We do not plan to introduce From rewriting because it would break
transaction matching and SER is not call stateful.
Jan.
On 03-12 14:23, Thilo Salmon wrote:
Hi,
I have to user agents. #1 is a registered iptel user and #2 is
registered with say "ipfon.org". UA #2 is only capable of numerical
adressing within its own realm (such as a Grandstream phone). UA #1 is
known to the world as 12345678(a)iptel.org and can be reached from UA #2
through its proxy by inviting 39312345678(a)ipfon.org (i.e. the user can
dial 39312345678 on the Grandstream to reach UA #1).
It would be terrific to submit a working callback address for UA #1 to
UA #2. This callback address however, needs to be within the called
party's realm, I believe (the Grandstream has comes with a dialpad
only). Unlike some pstn gateways the Grandstream does not parse the
Remote-Party-ID header field. Is there another header field to address
this issue? If not, I have no idea how this can be solved but by
rewriting the From header such as
UA #1 Proxy UA
#2
INVITE --> "REWRITE" -->
INVITE
From: 12345678(a)iptel.org From:
39312345678(a)ipfon.org
and keeping track of any subsequent messages. How would you approach
this problem?
I read through tmemo-jiri-sat.txt as this memo adresses the potential
problems and suggest an implementation. Has anybody started to implement
the suggested solution?
Thilo
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers