[pjsip] REFER, NOTIFY, and 408 timeout
psanchez at nortel.com
Tue Apr 8 15:37:26 EDT 2008
On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 16:21 +0100, Benny Prijono wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Pedro Sanchez <psanchez at nortel.com> wrote:
> > PJSIP sends a 200 message in response to the REFER while the other two
> > SIP stacks that I can test send 202 messages instead. The proxy is happy
> > with the other stacks but not with PJSIP.
> > Note below the reference to the expected 202 message in RFC 3515. Also,
> > as an example, see
> > http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-mahy-sip-remote-cc-04.txt (diagram in
> > section 3). Note how a 202 answer is always assumed in this context as
> > well.
> True, but I thought 200 is more appropriate when we have a definite
> knowledge that a NOTIFY will be sent immediately (see RFC 3265). And
> as you quoted, any 2xx code can be used to accept the request.
> But that's a good point though, I don't mind changing it if that works
> with more servers.
> > If you tell me where to go in the source code to modify this behaviour I
> > could test the scenario with PJSIP sending a 202 response. I'm using the
> > released version 0.8.
> Application can modify the status code in on_call_transfer_request()
> callback, and if this callback is not implemented, a 200 response to
> REFER will be generated instead. See on_call_transfered() function in
I know this is a rather old thread but I wanted to provide further
feedback on this issue. I finally had time to get back to my program and
to run some tests with our gateways.
The final word is that a 202 message makes the difference. Our gateways
are happy with it and I don't experience timeouts anymore.
So, if i may suggest, PJSIP should accept REFER messages with a 202
message by default. This seems to follow the letter of the RFCs, which I
acknowledge are not very explicit on this regard, and certainly it plays
well with my gateways.
More information about the pjsip