[OpenSIPS-Users] Why the best response is 408 instead of 486 when parallel forking?

[Bogdan-Andrei Iancu]

Hi Dan,

It looks like RFC3261 has the same opinion on the matter as you :).....

Regards,
Bogdan

Dan Pascu wrote:
> I don't know about all internally generated replies, but I know that if a 
> reply came from an end user device, it doesn't make much sense to pick an 
> internally generated 408 Timeout on a dead branch.
>
> Maybe doing a custom selection, instead of the "lower reply code wins", 
> would avoid the need to consider internal and external replies in a 
> different way.
>
> On Sunday 26 October 2008, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
>   
>> Hi Victor,
>>
>> You mean you should try to pick first an answer from the replies you
>> actually received and if none, go for the internally generated replies?
>>
>> Thanks and regards,
>> Bogdan
>>
>> Victor Pascual Ávila wrote:
>>     
>>> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc at aliax.net> 
>>>       
> wrote:
>   
>>>> Hi, I've a UA1 that is registered in two locations, UA1-a and UA1-b.
>>>> UA1-b is crashed and doesn't listen to SIP anymore.
>>>>
>>>> Other UA calls UA1 and OpenSIPS does parallel forking, so it gets
>>>> 180 from UA1-a.
>>>>
>>>> UA1-a replies 486, but OpenSIPS decides to reply "408 Timeout" to
>>>> the caller.
>>>>         
>>> I think you are right here: 408 should be sent if there are no final
>>> responses in the context.
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.opensips.org
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>     
>
>
>
>