Re: [Sip] [Sip-implementors] Different SDP Session Version in 183 &200 OK

[Nitin Kapoor <[e-mail]>]

Hi Sanjiv,

I do agree that "session-version" should increment by one from the previous
SDP when there is any modification is involved in SDP. But i haven't seen
any modification into the SDP of 183 & 200 OK/

Also, there was no SDP in ACK. If you need i can share the traces with you.

Thanks,
Nitin Kapoor

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:30 AM, Jaiswal, Sanjiv (NSN - IN/Bangalore) <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Nitin,
>
>
> Every SDP with incremented session ( in this case 200 OK) is treated as
> new negotiation(offer).
> Whether ACK from other end contains SDP answer? If yes then session
> version is incremented there also?
>
>
> Regards
> Sanjiv
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of ext
> Nitin Kapoor
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 3:03 PM
> To: Ashish Saxena
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] [Sip] Different SDP Session Version in
> 183 &200 OK
>
> Hello Ashish,
>
> Here is the mline for both the messages.
>
> 183:
>
> Media Description, name and address (m): audio 43888 RTP/AVP 18
>
> 200 OK:
>
> Media Description, name and address (m): audio 43888 RTP/AVP 18
>
> Thanks,
> Nitin Kapoor
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 3:25 AM, Ashish Saxena
> <[e-mail]>wrote:
>
> > what is the mline of 200OK SDP.
> >
> > Regards
> > Ashish Saxena
> > (www.aricent.com)
> > ________________________________________
> > From: [e-mail] [[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Nitin
> > Kapoor [[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:54 PM
> > To: [e-mail]
> > Cc: [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: [Sip] Different SDP Session Version in 183 & 200 OK
> >
> > Hello All,
> >
> > Could any one please help me out on requested query as below.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nitin
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Nitin Kapoor <[e-mail]
> > <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I have one call scenario where my termination is sending the SDP in
> 183 as
> > well as in 200 OK also. As far as i know if we are getting SDP in 183
> > session progress then my UAC can ignore the SDP in 200 OK. Also most
> of the
> > time SDP is same.
> >
> > But here i noticed the slight difference of "Session Version". Here
> when my
> > termination is sending 188 Session Progress with SDP is sending the
> SDP as
> > below.
> >
> > I can see that  my Termination is incrementing  "Session Version" for
> SDP
> > in 183 & 200 OK in same dialog..
> >
> > 183 with SDP
> >
> > S_OWNER : o=TLPMSXP2 22660 22660 IN IP4 69.90.230.210
> > S_NAME : s=sip call
> > S_CONNECT : c=IN IP4 69.90.230.217
> > TIME : t=0 0
> > M_NAME : m=audio 59072 RTP/AVP 18 4 8 98
> >
> > 200 OK with SDP:
> >
> > S_OWNER : o=TLPMSXP2 22660 22661 IN IP4 69.90.230.210
> > S_NAME : s=sip call
> > S_CONNECT : c=IN IP4 69.90.230.217
> > TIME : t=0 0
> >
> > Could anyone please let me know if that is okay to increment the
> session
> > version and if any supported document is there?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nitin
> >
> >
> > "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended
> solely
> > for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain
> > privileged or confidential information and should not be circulated or
> used
> > for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have
> received
> > this message in error, please notify the originator immediately. If
> you are
> > not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly
> > prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents
> of this
> > message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising
> from
> > the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage
> from
> > virus."
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>