| Summary: | ASTERISK-09000: correct response sent in local_attended_transfer()? | ||
| Reporter: | Serge Vecher (serge-v) | Labels: | |
| Date Opened: | 2007-03-13 12:23:51 | Date Closed: | 2011-06-07 14:08:27 |
| Priority: | Minor | Regression? | No |
| Status: | Closed/Complete | Components: | Channels/chan_sip/Transfers |
| Versions: | Frequency of Occurrence | ||
| Related Issues: | |||
| Environment: | Attachments: | ||
| Description: | Was looking at the code in the area for another bug and noticed an apparent [to me] contradiction between the comment and the response. To my limited knowledge and quick research, we should not be send a "successful" response here. 13673 : /* We did not find the referred call. Sorry, can't accept then */ 13674 : transmit_response(transferer, "202 Accepted", req); ****** ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ****** oej, sorry if I am raising a flag for no reason here. | ||
| Comments: | By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2007-03-14 07:52:14 I'll check, don't remember on the top of my head. It is confusing the we send error codes not in the response to the REFER but in the first NOTIFY sometimes. By: Olle Johansson (oej) 2007-04-27 09:59:59 We do first say "accepted" then (as you see in the comments) fake a failure in the NOTIFY, Which is the correct behaviour. | ||