We've a situation where tens or potentially hundreds of Contact
addresses need to be bound to an AoR. Don't ask me why - it is an
outcome of putting SIP in a large legacy switching system.

While allowed by SIP, it would seem somewhat awkward to send hundreds
of Contact URIs in a SIP REGISTER message in a practical sense.
Furthermore, it would be seriously detrimental to Registrar's
performance if hundreds of UACs start sending hundreds of Contact URIs
in their REGISTER messages all at once (for instance, at system start
up).

One way to solve this problem would be to pre-configure the Registrar
with the Contact addresses using some out-of-band mechanism. The
REGISTER message can then be used to turn the bindings on or off as
opposed to carrying the bindings in it. Assuming that such an
out-of-band mechanism for pre-configuring the Registrar exists, the
question then would be what should we send in the Contact header in
the REGISTER message.

We could send one of the IP addresses from the Contacts set, but
that's not really correct and a bit misleading. We could say that
individual Contact groups are assigned their own domain name (e.g.
sip:cgp100.com) and then carry that domain name in the Contact URI. We
don't really have to or want to put these domain names in the DNS.
It's basically a string that would identify which Contact group should
be tied up to the AoR present in the To: header. You can assume that
we control both the UAC and the Registrar and they are in sync with
respect to what Contact URIs are present in each of these domain
names.

I'm not sure whether it makes to sense to use domain names in a
Contact URI. The SIP ABNF allows it. Any thoughts or suggestions on
this?

-- 
Thanks,
Raj Jain

mailto:rj2807 at gmail dot com
sip:rjain at iptel dot org
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to