Re: [Sip] TCP to UDP rtcp media attributes in SDP not passing through nextone

"DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> Fri, 12 February 2010 13:15 UTC

Return-Path: <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBD3128C187 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:15:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.126
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.126 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.877, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6-3s60+sX-B8 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:15:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.57]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 961E53A70E2 for <sip@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:15:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.61]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id o1CDGfJL007384 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:16:43 +0100
Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.44]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.61]) with mapi; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:16:22 +0100
From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: aayush bhatnagar <abhatnagar192006@gmail.com>, Nitin Kapoor <nitinkapoorr@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:16:21 +0100
Thread-Topic: [Sip] TCP to UDP rtcp media attributes in SDP not passing through nextone
Thread-Index: Acqr5S5Syh2jC/T9T8OitMk1y32ajgAAD2rw
Message-ID: <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE20AFB8C32@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <c80c92d1002120433y102bfa24p6bcd2cd2bee42a87@mail.gmail.com> <c80c92d1002120437l35adde35hd5e865ba1d3b2354@mail.gmail.com> <abcc59881002120512l41572f59pd8f3570ebe774c69@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <abcc59881002120512l41572f59pd8f3570ebe774c69@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.80
Cc: "sip@ietf.org" <sip@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Sip] TCP to UDP rtcp media attributes in SDP not passing through nextone
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:15:29 -0000

If you are going to do this, please respect the size limits on posting. Otherwise put on a website and send a link, or send directly.

regards

Keith 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sip-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces@ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of aayush bhatnagar
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 1:13 PM
> To: Nitin Kapoor
> Cc: sip@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Sip] TCP to UDP rtcp media attributes in SDP 
> not passing through nextone
> 
> Can you paste wireshark logs for both ends of the SBC?
> 
> On 12/02/2010, Nitin Kapoor <nitinkapoorr@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear Friend,
> >
> > I have some query about UDP & TCP for signaling.
> >
> > Basically I am using TCP protocol for signaling from my customer to 
> > SBC and then SBC to Vendor using UDP for signaling. I mean 
> CS user TCP 
> > to SBC, UDP to carrier.  And OCS sends initial 183 with sdp that 
> > contains rtcp media attribute information and SBC does not 
> forward formation to carrier via UDP.
> >
> >
> > Call Flow is like this.
> >
> > UAC (Private)                    SBC
> > UAS(Public)
> >
> > |-----------Invite(TCP)---------->
> > |                                                       |
> > |
> > |                                                       |
> > |<-------- 100 Trying ------------ |
> >                                           |
> > |                                        | ----------- Invite
> > (UDP)----------------------->|
> > |
> > |                                                       |
> > |                                        |<--------- 100 Trying
> > ---------------------------|
> > |
> > |                                                       |
> >                                          | <---- 183 SDP Session
> > Progress-------|
> > |                                        |(183 SDP with RTCP Media
> >     |
> > |                                        |Attribute).
> >                                        |
> > |<--------- 183 SDP -------------
> > |
> > |
> > | 183 SDP Session
> > progress|                                                       |
> > | Without RTCP Media         |
> >                                                |
> > |Attribute
> > |                                                       |
> > |
> > |                                                       |
> > |
> > |                                                       |
> > |
> > |                                                       |
> >
> > Could anyone please help me out on this scenario. Why it’s 
> not sending 
> > the RTCP attribute to my UAC? Is there anything related to standard.
> >
> > I can share the Traces, if its required.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nitin Kapoor
> >
> 
> 
> --
> aayush
> http://in.linkedin.com/in/abhatnagar19
> ======
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use 
> sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip 
> Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip
>