[Serusers] 487 hop to hop????
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
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.
> 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?
>> Serusers mailing list
>> serusers at lists.iptel.org
More information about the sr-users