On 4/30/15 9:28 AM, Alex Balashov wrote:
No, that's not correct. The provider needs to send DNIS in the RURI in these
cases, and providers should have a setting to enable this. It does require
overriding the Contact binding of the registrant (if applicable), which is not
RFC-compliant, but tha
No, that's not correct. The provider needs to send DNIS in the RURI in these
cases, and providers should have a setting to enable this. It does require
overriding the Contact binding of the registrant (if applicable), which is not
RFC-compliant, but that's okay.
--
Alex Balashov | Principal | E
On 4/30/15 7:35 AM, Alex Balashov wrote:
On 04/30/2015 07:31 AM, Andres wrote:
I am inclined to believe this is perfectly normal and compliant but let
me know what you think.
Yep, it's normal. Moreover, only the RURI value should be used for
routing purposes or for anything else that's conse
On 04/30/2015 07:31 AM, Andres wrote:
I am inclined to believe this is perfectly normal and compliant but let
me know what you think.
Yep, it's normal. Moreover, only the RURI value should be used for
routing purposes or for anything else that's consequential in relation
to the destination;
I have a general question maybe somebody can help me out with. We have
a new SIP Trunk setup with a provider. The SIP Trunk has a username of
'jane' and it handles 400 DIDs. When the incoming INVITE from the
provider comes in, the URI in the Invite is the username of the trunk
while the To h
The Request URI (request line) is the one that should be used for any routing
purpose. The To field is a purely cosmetic commentary on the intended logical
destination of the call--it should never be used for routing determination.
Amar S Tuladhar wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>
>
>What is the differenc
Hi all,
What is the difference between "Called number address in Request-Line" and
"Called number in TO field"?
If the "Called Number" address is different which one shall be taken? Is
there any RFC recommendation governing this?
For example : if in "REQUEST-LINE" it is 61977 and in "TO" i
El Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:30:48 +0545
"Amar Tuladhar" escribió:
> Dear all,
>
> Hope you will help us with this issue.
Please, do not use the "answer" button to create a new topic. You break thread
views.
thanks,
jon
___
SIP Express Router (SER) and
On 10/11/2011 02:45 AM, Amar Tuladhar wrote:
Hope you will help us with this issue.
In the INVITE message there is a field name CONTACT.
1.Is it possible that the ‘port’ in the CONTACT field is different
from the UDP port?
What's "the UDP port"? The source port from which the INVITE request
Dear all,
Hope you will help us with this issue.
In the INVITE message there is a field name CONTACT.
1. Is it possible that the 'port' in the CONTACT field is different
from the UDP port?
2. What shall be the action in case the ports are different?
3. Is it true that the UDP
10 matches
Mail list logo
