[SR-Users] reply code for lower cseq

[Olle E. Johansson]

24 apr 2012 kl. 14:27 skrev Daniel-Constantin Mierla:

> Hello,
> 
> thanks, I found that as well, but I didn't wanted to believe is no update to it in regard to sip client behavior. A phone replying with such generic code is really misleading for such case . So I searched further in 4xx class, base rfc and other extensions, and could not find anything.
> 
You propably want to add a reason header or something to explain for the poor guy running wireshark.
The error code is not all.

/O
> Cheers,
> Danie
> 
> On 4/24/12 2:17 PM, Andrew Pogrebennyk wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>> See RFC 3261 section 12.2.2:
>> 
>>    If the remote sequence number was not empty, but the sequence number
>>    of the request is lower than the remote sequence number, the request
>>    is out of order and MUST be rejected with a 500 (Server Internal
>>    Error) response.
>> 
>> However, 400 or some 4xx response would seem more reasonable to me, to
>> let the UAC know it just did something wrong.
>> And I'm not the only one:
>> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.sip-implementors/8970
>> 
>> On 04/24/2012 02:10 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I was wondering if someone here can point quickly where specs mention
>>> what is the right reply code to send when a request within dialog is
>>> received with lower cseq value than the previous request. I couldn't
>>> spot the part in the RFC yet, if any related exists.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Daniel
>>> 
> 
> -- 
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
> http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

---
* Olle E Johansson - oej at edvina.net
* Cell phone +46 70 593 68 51, Office +46 8 96 40 20, Sweden