Ranjit Avasarala wrote:
>
> Hi Vijay,
>
> But why would the two responses clash in a normal scenario, they would
> be queued. so UA may not get another 2xx response.
I'm not quite sure I follow you here. Queued by whom? If a proxy forks and
sends 2 downstream requests, and if both of the UAS thus contacted return
2xx, the proxy MUST send both 2xx upstream. Where/Why would it queue them?
A UAC will not get a non-2xx response once it has received a 2xx response,
but it sure can get another 2xx response (unless of course the UAC forked
the request itself).
> Also UA0 sends the INVITE message to PS and it expects PS to fork the
> requests. So why would you say that UA0 will not know what PS is going to
> do?
No, UA0 does NOT know if PS will fork or not. Forking is a proxy policy.
Depending on the time of the day, the proxy may decide not to fork, or to
fork serially, or to fork in parallel, ... The point I am making is that a
UA cannot know for certain that:
(a) the next hop server is a UAS or a proxy (except for UACs that are
configured to send all requests to an outbound proxy)
(b) the next hop server, if it is a proxy, will fork or not.
> and since UA2 has sent a final response to UA0, we need not even consider
> media capabilites.
If UA2 sends a 2xx response to UA0, someone better consider media capa-
bilities...
Best regards,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani vkg@{lucent.com,research.bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Internet Software and eServices Group
Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs Innovations 263 Shuman Blvd., Rm 1A-413
Naperville, Illinois 60566 Voice: +1 630 224 0216 Fax: +1 630 713 0184
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
