Do you think following lines (lines within #) have to be added within
RFC section 16.5 Determining Request Targets
"If the domain of the Request-URI indicates a domain this element is
not responsible for, the Request-URI MUST be placed into the target
set as the only target, and the element MUST proceed to the task of
Request Forwarding (Section 16.6).
There are many circumstances in which a proxy might receive a
request for a domain it is not responsible for. A firewall proxy
handling outgoing calls (the way HTTP proxies handle outgoing
requests) is an example of where this is likely to occur."
####################################
# Addition suggested?!
If the route-header is present, the Request-URI MUST be placed into the
target set as the only target, and the element MUST proceed to the task of
Request Forwarding (Section 16.6).
# End of Addition.
#####################################
"If the target set for the request has not been predetermined as
described above, this implies that the element is responsible for the
domain in the Request-URI, and the element MAY use whatever mechanism
it desires to determine where to send the request..."
Thanks
Sachin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sp.Raja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Sachin Shenoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Sip-Implementors" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 6:04 PM
Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] Target set caluclation & Route header
> Even though it is not explicitly stated,
>
> RFC 3261 Sec 20.34 reads
>
> The Route header field is used to force routing for a request through
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> the listed set of proxies. Examples of the use of the Route header
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> field are in Section 16.12.1.
>
> -Sp.Raja
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sachin Shenoy
> Sent: Thursday, 29 August 2002 6:03 PM
> To: Sp.Raja
> Cc: Sip-Implementors
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Target set caluclation & Route header
>
>
> Thanks for you reply.
>
> I couldn't find mention of this explicitly anywhere in the RFC. Can you
> please give me any pointer to section within RFC which deals with this.
>
> I expected section 16.5 Determining Request Targets, to explictly mention
> that if route is present then it would be placed as the only entry within
> the
> target set.
>
> Thanks
> Sachin
>
>
> comments inline
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Sachin Shenoy
> Sent: Thursday, 29 August 2002 5:33 PM
> To: Sip-Implementors
> Subject: [Sip-implementors] Target set caluclation & Route header
>
>
> Hi,
>
> According to the RFC, If the domain of the request-uri is of proxies
domain
> then proxy is responsible for routing the request. What would happen if
> the domain of the request URI is proxies domain, but the request also
> contains route header?
>
> What should proxy do? Forward the request to the location in the route
> header? Or do a locations search and forward to the locations returned
> from the search.
> [Raja] First preference always goes to the Route irrespective of whether
the
> proxy is responsible for the domain or not
>
> Thanks
> Sachin
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
