[Serusers] 487 hop to hop????

Greg Fausak lgfausak at gmail.com
Thu Aug 25 16:05:46 CEST 2005


I've been scouring the RFCs looking for this verbiage.
One of our developers here is telling me that is a mistake, that the
487 needs to come from the far end.  Do you know where I might
find more information about this topic?

It seems to me that the ser proxy is responding to the cancel with
a 487.  If I had to make it come from the far end can that be  
accomplished with

Thank you for your feedback,


On Aug 25, 2005, at 1:47 AM, Klaus Darilion wrote:

> That's right! CANCEL and 487 are hob-by-hob, if the corresponding  
> INVITE was forwarded stateful.
> regards
> klaus
> Greg Fausak wrote:
>> I've got a call trace that shows an INVITE being CANCELed, the
>> CANCEL is hop to hop.  I had thought the 487 was generated
>> at the other end and came all the way back, but my call
>> traces indicate that the 487 is being generated hop to hop as well.
>> That's not right, is it?
>> ---greg
>> _______________________________________________
>> Serusers mailing list
>> serusers at lists.iptel.org
>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

More information about the sr-users mailing list