30 Apr
2010
30 Apr
'10
2:31 a.m.
Maxim Sobolev wrote:
Jan Janak wrote:
Maybe it is related as the ACK is generated by the proxy itself and the
OPTIONS too.
Anyway, I think branch=0 is not a clean solution, but RFC 3261 (17.2.3)
defines that clients must support old transaction matching schema too.
regards
klaus
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 6:30 AM, Maxim Sobolev
<sobomax(a)sippysoft.com>
wrote:
It doesn't look like the same issue at all. The thread is about branch
in ACK being different from branch in 200 OK, while this one is about
branch in OPTIONS that the proxy generates to keep NAT binding alive. Klaus Darilion wrote:
There was a thread discussing this a long time ago, see:
http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2005-April/018559.html
Hope that helps. > Why not to use a SIP/2.0 compliant branch
(z9hG4bK...)? any reason?
Maybe this is the method to detect keep-alive replies and absorb them
before they enter dialplan processing.
I don't think it's intentional.