5 Commits (mr12.2)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Daniel Grotti	cdcbbb7866	MT#57562 sems (CE): Add Allow header in 200 OK when empty ... This is a partial rework of b67428d. The patch was always saving the Allow header from the initial INVITE and replacing the Allow header in the 200 OK with that. This fixed an issue with AA, where Allow header in the 200 OK, generated by the AA, was empty. But it causes an issue in case of normal calls between A and B. In general we want to keep the Allow header in the 200 OK, if exist. Instead, we want to add the Allow header in the 200 OK response in case the 200 OK does not contain the Allow header. In this case we won't set the original Allow from the INVITE but instead we will set a default Allow header (SIP_REPLY_DEFAULT_ALLOW) containing all the major SIP method. Change-Id: I6bf5a2cc7e0228f7b99d28963d16c14c463be695	3 years ago
Donat Zenichev	aec816dad7	MT#56321 Add 'Allow:' header to the 200OK, if present in the request ... We have to take care of keeping the actual 'Allow:' header in the request, if the incoming request has had it. One of the use cases for that is for example the INVITE coming to the AA, when we must respond with the 200OK, but there is no 'Allow:' header inside the 200OK. Certain systems can be confused by that, even though the RFCs are not forcing us to do so. Which can even lead to an impossibility to use a normal call clearing with the BYE method, from behalf of the caller. Change-Id: I9bafb89e4aa5e53077450068f847c07a497b43f1	4 years ago
Victor Seva	2bf464e5cb	Imported Upstream version 1.6.0~20150612~a2d214df36	11 years ago
Victor Seva	be6b7d527c	Imported Upstream version 1.6.0~20140819~0b6d12	12 years ago
Victor Seva	df9992620d	Imported Upstream version 1.6.0~20140516~eaa616	12 years ago