Re: [sipx-users] sipx an PhonerLite
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 14:31 +0400, Nikolay Kondratyev wrote:
> Paul,
>
> The problem is that phoner changes the To Tag in the second Register
> message.
>
> The To header should be the same (including “tag” field).
>
> It is somewhere in rfc 3261, as far as I remember.
RFC 3261 section 8.1.1.4 Call-ID:
... Note that when requests are retried after certain
failure responses that solicit an amendment to a request (for
example, a challenge for authentication), these retried requests are
not considered new requests, and therefore do not need new Call-ID
header fields; see Section 8.1.3.5.
and then section 8.1.3.5 Processing 4xx Responses:
Certain 4xx response codes require specific UA processing,
independent of the method.
If a 401 (Unauthorized) or 407 (Proxy Authentication Required)
response is received, the UAC SHOULD follow the authorization
procedures of Section 22.2 and Section 22.3 to retry the request with
credentials.
[...]
In all of the above cases, the request is retried by creating a new
request with the appropriate modifications. This new request
constitutes a new transaction and SHOULD have the same value of the
Call-ID, To, and From of the previous request, but the CSeq should
contain a new sequence number that is one higher than the previous.
Note that RFC 2119 defines SHOULD:
3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that
there
may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
particular item, but the full implications must be understood and
carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
