On Aug 20, 2009, at 5:25 PM, Carlos S. Antunes wrote:
Raymond Chandler wrote:
On Aug 20, 2009, at 5:03 PM, Carlos S. Antunes wrote:
Hmm, where does it say that, after the lookup, one cannot use the
same
IP address as before? :)
Section 4 of RFC3263 as quoted in my first email....
"The procedures here MUST be done exactly once per transaction,
where transaction is as defined in [1].
"
Raymond, sure. But do the "procedures here" preclude one from
choosing the same host given that both the priorities and weights
are the same for all the hosts?
well, not exactly, in fact... every so often, you will end up choosing
the same 1 out of 4 hosts twice in a row at random, but the procedures
basically say to choose one at random if they're evenly prioritized
and evenly weighted.... so saying "i'm gonna keep this one for later
user" kind of goes against "random"
That said, I'm really just about done with this thread since I don't
personally agree with the spec in this case anyway since stale nonce
checking makes sense to avoid replay attacks, etc. Although, I
haven't looked at the specs to see if checking for stale nonces breaks
any specs... that might be an interesting search ;-)
Raymond Chandler
http://freeswitchsolutions.com
http://cluecon.com
http://cudatel.com_______________________________________________
FreeSWITCH-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
http://www.freeswitch.org
