From: "Alexeitsev, D" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The issue is following - consider an INVITE from A to AOR-B that gets forked by a proxy to AOR-C and AOR-D. If any of the targets AOR-C and AOR-D is busy the possible CCBS possible indication in any of the 486 responses will not survive the response aggregation in proxy and will not make it's way to the A. Let's call this scenario A) proxy with no monitor forking to foreign AORs.
In my opinion there is no issues, as there is no possible way to make such a scenario function fair, so there is not problem is the CC service will not function in this case at all. I don't know why you say this, as the initial text I provided for the I-D was deliberately constructed so as to make this case work. The crucial features of a solution to this problem are: 1) The caller may attempt CC without receiving a "CC possible" indication in the failure of the original call. If CC is not possible, the caller will discover it in the failure of (all forks of) the CC SUBSCRIBE. 2) The caller sends the CC SUBSCRIBE to the *same request-URI* as the original call. In almost all cases, this will result in the SUBSCRIBE reaching all monitors which might allow CC subscription for the original call. (The caller should also directly subscribe to any monitors that it learns of in "CC possible" indications of provisional and final responses.) Dale _______________________________________________ BLISS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
