While using Pbxnsip version 2.0, I found the following -
[1] I have a simple setup with Pbxnsip with two extensions registered. The scenario I'm testing is when the extension sip:201@pbxnsip.domain sends an INVITE to the other extension sip:202@pbxnsip.domain. The problem is that the INVITE received by 202 (when 201 calls it) has URI <sip:202@128.59.20.93:5060> in the contact header. This is wrong as the URI should be the URI of 201, not the one of 202. Have I configured Pbxnsip wrongly? Has anyone else seen the same/similar behavior?
[2] Pbxnsip puts the payload type 2 for a dynamic codec (G726-32/8000). Since payload types 1 and 2 are reserved as per IANA documentation, isn't this a non-standard practice?
I've attached a log snippet as captured at the extension 202.
Pbxnsip v2.0 - Issues in the contact header and payload type
in General Setup
Posted
Hello,
While using Pbxnsip version 2.0, I found the following -
[1] I have a simple setup with Pbxnsip with two extensions registered. The scenario I'm testing is when the extension sip:201@pbxnsip.domain sends an INVITE to the other extension sip:202@pbxnsip.domain. The problem is that the INVITE received by 202 (when 201 calls it) has URI <sip:202@128.59.20.93:5060> in the contact header. This is wrong as the URI should be the URI of 201, not the one of 202. Have I configured Pbxnsip wrongly? Has anyone else seen the same/similar behavior?
[2] Pbxnsip puts the payload type 2 for a dynamic codec (G726-32/8000). Since payload types 1 and 2 are reserved as per IANA documentation, isn't this a non-standard practice?
I've attached a log snippet as captured at the extension 202.
Any suggestions are helpful.
Sincerely,
Archana.