| Previous | Next |
| RTC_E_BASIC_AUTH_SET_TLS | RTC_E_PROFILE_SERVER_UNAUTHORIZED |
RTC_E_SIP_HIGH_SECURITY_SET_TLS
Where the state changes: RTC_E_SIP_HIGH_SECURITY_SET_TLS
The useful interpretation of this result is narrower than “SIP error”; within selecting an allowed authentication method, validating the challenge realm, and establishing a protected SIP transport, it means the requested high-security RTC mode is paired with a signaling transport other than TLS.
The stored Value is 0x80EE0040 in the RTC interface facility 0xEE; for this HRESULT, keep both forms in telemetry so COM error wrapping does not erase whether RTC produced an interface result, mapped a SIP response, or surfaced a PINT outcome.
Start the result investigation by having the trace record security-level setting, server transport, and profile selection; for this HRESULT, do not skip the distinction that security policy requires transport protection before any connection attempt is made.
Telemetry and packet evidence
The evidence set for this HRESULT should begin at the first failing or completing RTC boundary; for this HRESULT, reconnect and teardown events are secondary unless they caused the original result.
- Code-specific proof for this HRESULT: record security-level setting, server transport, and profile selection.
- Addressing context for this HRESULT: authentication scheme and realm.
- RTC callback state for this HRESULT: credential identity without secret material.
- Transaction boundary for this HRESULT: certificate subject and validation failure.
- Media or profile detail for this HRESULT: client/server UTC time and
TLSphase.
For privacy-safe analysis of this result, preserve protocol structure rather than payload content; for this HRESULT, authentication values, complete addresses, buddy lists, and bodies should be redacted or hashed under policy.
Protocol and object boundary
| RTC area | SIP authentication and TLS identity boundary |
|---|---|
| Condition to prove | the requested high-security RTC mode is paired with a signaling transport other than TLS |
| Objects to correlate | profile authentication method, challenge headers, realm, credential source, TLS certificate and tunnel |
| Safe corrective direction | select TLS and a valid server identity or reduce the requirement only through explicit policy |
Two RTC rules frame this result: first, RTC profile rules tie some authentication methods to TCP or TLS; Basic authentication requires TLS in the legacy API contract; second, for this HRESULT, A certificate failure, a challenge mismatch, and invalid credentials occur at different layers and need different remediation.
Actions that do not address this condition
- The following shortcut is unsafe for this HRESULT: do not never record Authorization header contents or plaintext passwords.
- This result is not corrected when operators do not disable certificate checking or lower transport security to make authentication appear successful.
- Do not translate it into a broad “connection failed” label before preserving the RTC symbol and producing phase.
Step-by-step isolation
- Record it and
0x80EE0040at the first RTC method or event that returns it. - Identify the client, profile, session, participant, presence object, terminal, or port manager that owns this it occurrence.
- Place it in its exact phase: parsing, discovery, transport, authentication, profile validation, dialog control, media, roaming, registration, redirection, or final response handling.
- prove the condition by ensuring the trace can record security-level setting, server transport, and profile selection.
- Apply one controlled change for this HRESULT: select
TLSand a valid server identity or reduce the requirement only through explicit policy; then verify the result return value and resulting RTC state.
Use RTC event state to interpret the protocol trace for this HRESULT, and use the trace to verify what left or reached the host; for this HRESULT, this two-sided correlation identifies the producing layer.
Remediation boundary
The owning RTC component should select TLS and a valid server identity or reduce the requirement only through explicit policy; for this HRESULT, it should also settle or cancel its previous operation before callers begin a replacement.
A retry after it is safe only after the prior transaction’s outcome is reconciled; after it, reissuing state-changing requests while the peer result is unknown can create contradictory RTC state.
Example for this HRESULT: An application enables high security while retaining a UDP registrar entry.
Comparison with adjacent codes
It is tied to the condition “the requested high-security RTC mode is paired with a signaling transport other than TLS”; preserve that producing boundary before choosing recovery; for this HRESULT, the neighboring results below require different control-flow decisions.
RTC_E_BASIC_AUTH_SET_TLS | the profile allows Basic authentication without selecting the TLS transport required by RTC |
|---|---|
RTC_E_SIP_AUTH_FAILED | the selected SIP authentication attempt was rejected or could not validate for the challenge |
RTC_E_SIP_AUTH_TIME_SKEW | SIP authentication validation failed because client and server time differ beyond the accepted window |
The comparison prevents it from being flattened into a subsystem-wide error bucket with unsafe generic remediation.
Verification after a fix
A useful it regression does more than expect an exception; the result test constructs “the requested high-security RTC mode is paired with a signaling transport other than TLS”, checks the exact HRESULT at the producing RTC boundary, and verifies state ownership before and after the targeted correction.
Technical references
- Microsoft profile creation rules — definitions relevant when reproducing it.
- Microsoft RTC return constants — API or protocol rules used to interpret it.
- SIP authentication and TLS — authoritative context for the boundary.
Looking for a different code? Search another status or error code.