[Asterisk-Dev] RE: 487 message in response to CANCEL

[Olle E. Johansson]

Tom Schroer wrote:

>>Message: 9
>>Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 14:34:47 +0100
>>From: "Michael Procter" <michael.procter at citel.com>
>>Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Dev] 487 message in response to CANCEL
>>To: "Asterisk Developers Mailing List" <asterisk-dev at lists.digium.com>
>>Message-ID: <CD9775120D600F43B9C50329395E9DB6174E40 at ivor.citel.com>
>>Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>>
>>
>>>However, asterisk does not send a 487 message to the
>>>calling party.  I wanted to get others' opinions on whether 
>>
>>this last
>>
>>>issue, where no 487 message is sent to the calling party, is 
>>>consistent with 3261.  Here is the call flow of what is occurring.  
>>
>>RFC3261 requires a 487 to be sent.  However, it notes that equipment
>>compliant with the earlier SIP spec (RFC2543) will not issue the 487,
>>and so RFC3261-compliant equipment should be compatible with both
>>approaches.
>>
>>Therefore, Asterisk MUST send the 487, but SHOULD NOT require it of
>>party B in your diagram.  See RFC3261 section 9.1 (last para) and
>>section 28.1 (bullet 5).
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Michael Procter
> 
> Thanks so much for responding, I interpreted the rfc in a similar
> manner.  I attempted to look through chan_sip to see if anything would
> jump out at me to see why * was not sending a 487 message - not sure if
> that's the right place to look nor was I sure what I was looking for.
> Even with the latest CVS release (CVS-HEAD-10/07/04-08:19:37), * is not
> sending a 487 message.  Bug maybe? 
Please report this in the Asterisk bug tracker, http://bugs.digium.com

/O