Ok, so here are the INVITE bodies from 3.1 and 5.1:
3.1:
INVITE sip:
recepient number@sip.VoipStunt.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.0.254:5060;branch=z9hG4bK-d87543-b92cc543b9519762-1--d87543-;rport
Max-Forwards: 70
Contact: <sip:zyonee@
my ip address:5060>
To: "
recepient number"<sip:
recepient number@sip.VoipStunt.com:5060>
From: "
incoming number"<sip:
[email protected]>;tag=4f75e820
Call-ID: MjY3NTI4YzAzNmVjZjg2MjkzMTY2NjU3ODBhZDhiYTA.
CSeq: 2 INVITE
Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REGISTER, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, REFER, INFO
Content-Type: application/sdp
User-Agent: 3CXPhoneSystem
Authorization: Digest username="zyonee",realm="sip.VoipStunt.com",nonce="3368774517",uri="sip:
recepient number@sip.VoipStunt.com:5060",response="342240e9eae880ff2acee1829c2e4d02",algorithm=MD5
Content-Length: 249
5.1:
INVITE sip:
recepient number@sip.VoipStunt.com:5060 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.0.254:5060;branch=z9hG4bK-d87543-834e3875a03d8c07-1--d87543-;rport
Max-Forwards: 70
Contact: <sip:zyonee@
my ip address:5060>
To: <sip:
recepient number@sip.VoipStunt.com:5060>
From: "
incoming number"<sip:
[email protected]:5060>;tag=40310a61
Call-ID: NDUwZmI1NmFjMDk2NzdhZGFhY2FlN2YwOWFmZmNhN2E.
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REGISTER, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, REFER, INFO
User-Agent: 3CXPhoneSystem 5.1.4078.0
Content-Length: 0
and the 400 body in 5.1:
SIP/2.0 400 Bad request
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.0.254:5060;branch=z9hG4bK-d87543-834e3875a03d8c07-1--d87543-;rport
From: "
incoming number" <sip:
[email protected]:5060>;tag=40310a61
To: <sip:
recepient number@sip.VoipStunt.com:5060>
Contact: sip:
recepient number@194.120.0.198:5060
Call-ID: NDUwZmI1NmFjMDk2NzdhZGFhY2FlN2YwOWFmZmNhN2E.
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Server: (Very nice Sip Registrar/Proxy Server)
Allow: ACKBYE,CANCEL,INVITE,REGISTER,OPTIONS,INFO,MESSAGE
Content-Length: 0
I hope this is the information that you wanted to see. If you want them, I have wireshark tcp dumps that I could send you. I don't know why Cellip doesn't wait for a 200 OK response before requesting ACK. Is there any way to work around this? Exactly why does that cause any problem, anyway?