Discussion:
[Sip-implementors] SDP reply incident
Sourav Dhar Chaudhuri
2014-08-07 12:46:25 UTC
Permalink
Hi,
?? I am observing a? SDP reply? from an INVITE mentioned below. Please let me know whether the response can B is valid


A calls B;
A's call agent is 1.1.1.1 &
Media GW is 1.1.1.2
B's call Agent is 2.2.2.1 and B's Media gw is 2.2.2.2
in INVITE request, A send the SDP,
In that A will send its MGW's IP in
C=1.1.1.2
Connection Address: 1.1.1.2
Owner Address: 1.1.1.2
but problem is, when B
replies in 200OK ........... in that..
B is sending Owner address as
2.2.2.2 and connection address as 2.2.2.1
Owner address is B's CA, not MGW

Is this correct response.

Thanks,
Sourav Dhar Chaudhuri
Brett Tate
2014-08-08 10:04:28 UTC
Permalink
I'm not sure what you are referring to as the owner address. If it is
something which should match the connection address for security or other
reasons, talk to the MGW vendor or administrator, there might be a
configuration option to produce the behavior that you are expecting.

As an fyi, the straw working group is attempting to standardize some B2BUA
behavior.

http://tools.ietf.org/wg/straw/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sip-implementors-bounces at lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-
> implementors-bounces at lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Sourav Dhar
> Chaudhuri
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 8:46 AM
> To: sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: [Sip-implementors] SDP reply incident
>
> Hi,
> ?? I am observing a? SDP reply? from an INVITE mentioned below. Please
let
> me know whether the response can B is valid
>
>
> A calls B;
> A's call agent is 1.1.1.1 &
> Media GW is 1.1.1.2
> B's call Agent is 2.2.2.1 and B's Media gw is 2.2.2.2 in INVITE request,
A send
> the SDP, In that A will send its MGW's IP in
> C=1.1.1.2
> Connection Address: 1.1.1.2
> Owner Address: 1.1.1.2
> but problem is, when B
> replies in 200OK ........... in that..
> B is sending Owner address as
> 2.2.2.2 and connection address as 2.2.2.1 Owner address is B's CA, not
MGW
>
> Is this correct response.
pradeep kumar
2014-08-08 18:06:30 UTC
Permalink
Hi,



I understood your scenario in the following way, If I misunderstood please reply back with detailed information. so that I can help you better.



scenario:-



1. A's IP Address = 1.1.1.1

2. Media GW for A will be = 1.1.1.2

3. C's IP Address = 2.2.2.1

4. Media GW for B will be = 2.2.2.2

5. A will send INVITE with SDP like c=1.1.1.1/1.1.1.2

a. When A's IP will be there in connection attribute?

When A is in public IP.

b. When GW IP will be there in connection attribute?

When A is in behind NAT. / You made a configuration like call should go through MG.

6. Same logic will happen when B is responding with 200.



Questions:



1. Here why you are bothering about the owner parameter?

2. Here you forget to mention the RTP flow?

3. If there is a Media between A and B means? Did media flows with the Help of GW?



According to my understanding the Media might be flow in the below mentioned direction.



A -->B

B -->MG(A) --> A



Assumption:

B initiated the response with SDP like (o = 2.2.2.1 & c = 2.2.2.1). When the response is processed by MG. If B is in public IP then no need of MG support. In this case might be MG added his own IP address in owner parameter.



Note: The above mentioned assumption is said according to the field which I am working on. Might be your case is different.


Thanks,

Pradeep



> From: brett at broadsoft.com
> Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 06:04:28 -0400
> To: sourav_mitul at yahoo.co.in; sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SDP reply incident
>
> I'm not sure what you are referring to as the owner address. If it is
> something which should match the connection address for security or other
> reasons, talk to the MGW vendor or administrator, there might be a
> configuration option to produce the behavior that you are expecting.
>
> As an fyi, the straw working group is attempting to standardize some B2BUA
> behavior.
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/straw/
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sip-implementors-bounces at lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-
> > implementors-bounces at lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Sourav Dhar
> > Chaudhuri
> > Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 8:46 AM
> > To: sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > Subject: [Sip-implementors] SDP reply incident
> >
> > Hi,
> > I am observing a SDP reply from an INVITE mentioned below. Please
> let
> > me know whether the response can B is valid
> >
> >
> > A calls B;
> > A's call agent is 1.1.1.1 &
> > Media GW is 1.1.1.2
> > B's call Agent is 2.2.2.1 and B's Media gw is 2.2.2.2 in INVITE request,
> A send
> > the SDP, In that A will send its MGW's IP in
> > C=1.1.1.2
> > Connection Address: 1.1.1.2
> > Owner Address: 1.1.1.2
> > but problem is, when B
> > replies in 200OK ........... in that..
> > B is sending Owner address as
> > 2.2.2.2 and connection address as 2.2.2.1 Owner address is B's CA, not
> MGW
> >
> > Is this correct response.
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> Sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
Loading...