<blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid #aaa; margin: 10px 0; padding: 0 10px;"><p style="white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap: break-word;">Hello Kevin,</p><p style="white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap: break-word;">I think ITU-T Recommendation explain it as well.<br>https://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-T.38-201009-S!!PDF-E&type=items<br>In section, D.2.3.5 SDP parameter usage in SIP/SDP Offer/Answer negotiations, Table D.2 has those 3 cases explained as following,<br>t38UDPNoEC: No secondary IPF packets will be sent. The number of secondary messages is set<br>to zero in UDPTL.<br>t38UDPRedundancy: Only redundant error correction messages may be sent.<br>t38UDPFEC: The endpoints can use either redundancy or FEC error correction scheme. </p><p style="white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap: break-word;">Thanks,<br>Salah</p></blockquote><p style="white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap: break-word;">Thanks for the info. I think based on that the logic then it seems correct. Just another question (posted as a comment on the patch) then.</p><p><a href="https://gerrit.asterisk.org/c/asterisk/+/13180">View Change</a></p><p>1 comment:</p><ul style="list-style: none; padding: 0;"><li style="margin: 0; padding: 0;"><p><a href="https://gerrit.asterisk.org/c/asterisk/+/13180/2/res/res_pjsip_t38.c">File res/res_pjsip_t38.c:</a></p><ul style="list-style: none; padding: 0;"><li style="margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 16px;"><p style="margin-bottom: 4px;"><a href="https://gerrit.asterisk.org/c/asterisk/+/13180/2/res/res_pjsip_t38.c@723">Patch Set #2, Line 723:</a> </p><p><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid #aaa; margin: 10px 0; padding: 0 10px;"><pre style="font-family: monospace,monospace; white-space: pre-wrap;">                     } else {<br>                              if (!pj_stricmp2(&attr->value, "t38UDPRedundancy")) {<br>                                        ast_udptl_set_error_correction_scheme(session_media->udptl, UDPTL_ERROR_CORRECTION_REDUNDANCY);<br>                            } else if (!pj_stricmp2(&attr->value, "t38UDPFEC")) {<br>                                        ast_udptl_set_error_correction_scheme(session_media->udptl, UDPTL_ERROR_CORRECTION_FEC);<br>                           } else {<br>                                      ast_udptl_set_error_correction_scheme(session_media->udptl, UDPTL_ERROR_CORRECTION_NONE);<br>                          }<br>                     }<br></pre></blockquote></p><p style="white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap: break-word;">Wouldn't the same logic you added above apply if the incoming SDP is from the remote re-invite?</p></li></ul></li></ul><p>To view, visit <a href="https://gerrit.asterisk.org/c/asterisk/+/13180">change 13180</a>. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit <a href="https://gerrit.asterisk.org/settings">settings</a>.</p><div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/EmailMessage"><div itemscope itemprop="action" itemtype="http://schema.org/ViewAction"><link itemprop="url" href="https://gerrit.asterisk.org/c/asterisk/+/13180"/><meta itemprop="name" content="View Change"/></div></div>

<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-Project: asterisk </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-Branch: 13 </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-Change-Id: I343c62253ea4c8b7ee17abbfb377a4d484a14b19 </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-Change-Number: 13180 </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-PatchSet: 2 </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-Owner: Salah Ahmed <txrubel@gmail.com> </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-Reviewer: Friendly Automation </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-Reviewer: Kevin Harwell <kharwell@digium.com> </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-Comment-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 19:38:13 +0000 </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-HasComments: Yes </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-Has-Labels: No </div>
<div style="display:none"> Gerrit-MessageType: comment </div>