Juha Heinanen schrieb:
SourceForge.net writes: > Are you sure? I think the rules for finding the IP address of the SIP URI > in the Route header is RFC 3263. you do apply rfc 3263 rules, but in case of route header uri, the uri needs to identify a single element, i.e., it cannot be a domain.
why not? if you have several stateless proxies you can put a domain into route header and SRV can be used to distribute load.
Usually it is not done but I think it would be legal.
usually sip uas put outbound proxy (if given) in route header. also, when proxy inserts rr uri in request, it must identify an element, not domain: The URI placed in the Record-Route header field MUST resolve to the element inserting it (or a suitable stand-in) when the server location procedures of [4] are applied to it, so that subsequent requests reach the same SIP element.
Thus, having a server farm and using a domain which resolves to one of this servers is fine if the servers are equivalent (e.g. a outboundproxy server farm).
Further, it is not about Record-Route but about a preloaded route set. E.g. by using a domain as outboundproxy, you can share load over several OBPs. Then, when forwarding the initial INVITE the OBP adds a record-route header with it's IP address and thus all the in-dialog requests will be handled by the same proxy.
Thus, putting a domain into Record-Route/Route is fine if the multiple choices can handle it. Further, for pre-loaded route sets it is IMO a feature to use a domain.
regards klaus _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
