The central point of "each transaction should be completed independent of
others" is that all requests must be responded to and that the
INVITE,Response,ACK transaction must be completed. Sending a BYE or CANCEL
for a pending invite does not mean that the UAS does not have to send a
final response. The UAS sends a 487 response to the INVITE and a 200 OK
response to the BYE/CANCEL. The UAC expects a 487 (or other final response)
and must ACK that response.
(-:bob
Robert F. Penfield
Chief Software Architect
Acme Packet, Inc.
130 New Boston Street
Woburn, MA 01801
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ranjit Avasarala" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Anand Vasudevan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "SIP implementors"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Jonathan Rosenberg'"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Poornima Holla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Sunil Kumar T"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] FSM implementation issue..
> I think u can consider BYE and Invite as 2 different events ( rather than
> transactions)
>
> say X is in state : waitingForAck after X sent INVITE.
> then Y will be in Idle state and recives Invite. it will then send Ack and
> goes to next state.
> So now if X sends BYE to Y , ( BYE can be sent during any state )
>
> so then Y will go back to state Idle.
>
>
> Regards
> Ranjit
> Mascon Communication Technologies
> http://www.masconit.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Anand Vasudevan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: SIP implementors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 'Jonathan
> Rosenberg' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Poornima Holla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sunil Kumar T
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 6:26 AM
> Subject: [Sip-implementors] FSM implementation issue..
>
>
> Hi,
> I believe,in SIP,almost all FSM implementations are Transaction
based.And
> also,Jonathan's view of SIP transaction is,"each transaction should be
> completely independent of others"
>
> In a scenario where,User X sends INVITE to user Y,
> and immediately it sends BYE to Y to terminate the INVITE sent.(consider
no
> Final response for INVITE is sent by Y at this time)
>
> At Y's end,
> 1.How these two transactions(BYE & INVITE) can be independent to comply
with
> Jonathans' comments?
>
> 2.Will not the FSM for BYE need to interact with INVITE transaction FSM?(I
> feel there are seperate FSMs running for BYE and INVITE)
>
> Am i missing something major?
>
> Thanks for your comments,
> Anand
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
