[Moved to sip-implementors]
William,
You seem to assume that all calls are about voice, or at least RTP, and that in the absence of RTP the call is failed. Maybe that is the case for your endpoint, depending on what you are building, but it isn't true in general.
Even with RTP, the absence of traffic isn't necessarily a problem.
I am inclined not to give up on a call so easily. If you think something is wrong, why not send a reINVITE to test the signaling path first?
At the very least, have some consideration that other endpoints may not be as picky as you are.
In any case, the protocol says that if you don't get a 200 OK, even for a BYE, you should keep retransmitting until all the timers expire and yo finally give up. If you choose not to do this then you will have built a non-conforming device. (Maybe this will have to be added to the torture tests.)
Paul
William StanisLaus wrote:
I agree with you Davidson.. I'm talking about proper implementation all these time, which can detect RTP dropping :)
-William.
-----Original Message----- From: Davidson, Michael D [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 9:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fred Hasle; Juha Heinanen Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Shriram Natarajan; Srinivasa Rao Subject: RE: [Sip] BYE and 200 OK
If this call interworked to the PSTN then you run the risk of this call staying up until the far end hangs up. I know that there are several gateway vendors that never tear down the call based on the RTP stream stopping. They leave the call up until they either receive the BYE from the SIP side or a disconnect from the PSTN side. In this situation, if the far end does not hang up you will continue to be billed for the call for a potentially very long time. If implemented properly, there are other devices such as border controllers that will detect the RTP dropping, but this is not something that you can necessarily count on.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William StanisLaus
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 9:47 AM
To: 'Fred Hasle'; 'Juha Heinanen'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Shriram Natarajan'; 'Srinivasa Rao'
Subject: RE: [Sip] BYE and 200 OK
<< File: ATT585321.txt >> I'm claiming that i need not implement retransmit timer for BYE nor hold the resources after i dispose BYE.
I close all my resources immediately after i send BYE. So no hanging network resources.
including the CALL LEG and transcation for this CALL.
-William.
-----Original Message----- From: Fred Hasle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 8:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Juha Heinanen Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Shriram Natarajan; Srinivasa Rao Subject: RE: [Sip] BYE and 200 OK
The receipt of a 200 (OK) will not provide you any "spice" as you said,
but the receipt of a 200 (OK) is the only guarantee that
you have, as
the initiator of the BYE, to know that all the network resources between
you and the UAS have been released.
If you discard the timeout, there could be dangling network
resources,
because you as the UAC did not retransmit the BYE.
In my view, the 200 (OK) is mostly used to cancel your
retransmission
procedure. Fred.
-----Original Message-----
From: William StanisLaus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 9:49 AM
To: 'Juha Heinanen'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Shriram Natarajan'; 'Srinivasa Rao'
Subject: RE: [Sip] BYE and 200 OK
Ofcourse you are right , USER A cannot differentiate BYE getting LOST or
USER B is PANIC, So i should not wait for TIMEOUT and close the Call
Leg..
Once i dispose BYE, immediately i should release my
resource and close
the CALL LEG.
My question is WHY should i wait for 200 OK or TIMEOUT for BYE !!!
Does 200 OK is going to bring any spice to my CALL LEG, AM
i going to
continue my call after BYE based on any response (not only
200 OK)!!!
Otherwise am i implemented an intelligent system (SIP STACK) to remember
200
OK information for this USER B, so that if i call again,
i'll use the
information i got in my last call. NO
so I need not to wait for 200 OK or TIMEOUT after i dispose BYE.
-William.
-----Original Message----- From: Juha Heinanen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 7:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 'Srinivasa Rao'; 'Shriram Natarajan'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Sip] BYE and 200 OK
William StanisLaus writes:
> But this is silly.. since my USER B is dead.. entered
PANIC MODE !!! and
> cannot reply anything... Hence USER A cannot keep
sending BYE...
how can A tell the difference between bye getting lost and B being dead?
-- juha
_______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
_______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
