19 Apr
2005
19 Apr
'05
5:22 p.m.
The bug report is invalid, ignore it. branch=0 in ACK to a 200
is perfectly valid according to RFC3261. Your termination provider
must be using a buggy devices.
-jiri
At 07:04 PM 4/19/2005, Darryl H. Thomas wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was wondering whether anyone knew what was going on with the following
bug:
http://developer.berlios.de/bugs/?func=detailbug&bug_id=2925&group_…
For those not wanting to follow the links, this is a bug submitted by
someone back in December wherein ser puts 'branch=0' in the Via header it
creates for an ACK to a 200 OK Invite response.
I haven't seen any activity related to this, and it's affecting
interoperability with one of our termination providers.
0.9.0 users, have you seen the same problem??
Cheers,
Darryl
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/