I've made a subtle but important SIP change as part of bug #155. According to Mediatrix, the URI in "Contact" should be used as the URI in the top part of the SIP request when sending follow up messages, and they're allowed to use the same IP for from and to. I made the change to support that but I want to be sure we didn't break anything else, so if it did, let me know, on list, off-list, or on IRC (or via the bug tracker). Mark
Interesting. I am working on getting CID to work from * to my Cisco routers. I have a tac case open and they are giving me debug IOS's to work with but this is what they have come up with. Dont know if this will help quoted from my talks with Cisco TAC Hi Dave - A few more questions from our SIP guys. Normally the caller-id is taken from "remote-party-id" in the SIP INVITE. We don't see that field poplated in this INVITE. What is the originating gateway? What device is sending the call to the 827? We should be seeing "remote-party-id" in the INVITE. Thanks, Clay end quote Thanks Dave>>> markster@digium.com 8/23/2003 1:09:58 AM >>>I've made a subtle but important SIP change as part of bug #155. According to Mediatrix, the URI in "Contact" should be used as the URI in the top part of the SIP request when sending follow up messages, and they're allowed to use the same IP for from and to. I made the change to support that but I want to be sure we didn't break anything else, so if it did, let me know, on list, off-list, or on IRC (or via the bug tracker). Mark _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> Normally the caller-id is taken from "remote-party-id" in the SIP > INVITE. We don't see that field poplated in this INVITE. What is the > originating gateway? What device is sending the call to the 827? We > should be seeing "remote-party-id" in the INVITE.The string "remote-party-id" does not even appear in RFC3261. A little bit of googling reveals it seems to be something "up in the air" and there is no RFC which seems to reference it. Further, in its absense (as I have learned), RFC3261 states of the "From" header: The From header field indicates the logical identity of the initiator of the request, possibly the user's address-of-record. Like the To header field, it contains a URI and optionally a display name. It is used by SIP elements to determine which processing rules to apply to a request (for example, automatic call rejection). As such, it is very important that the From URI not contain IP addresses or the FQDN of the host on which the UA is running, since these are not logical names. Therefore, the Cisco should use it as CallerID. If, however they want it in a different form, let me know the document they're referencing and the form it's needed in and I'll see what I can do. Mark p.s. Does anyone still not see what a bloated, vague, and overly complicated pile of garbage SIP is (although H.323 still manages not to be outdone)?