ok thanks.

well in that case, I think you are correct except for case 4)

>>4) Is a 2xx with "Contact" and "RR". route set is updated since it's a 2xx. 
>>remote target is not updated since it already exists.
>>- route set: <sip:server3>
>>- remote target: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I didn't think the route set gets changed on 2xx if an 18x has already
established the dialog.

Can you tell me where it says 2xx is special?

Regards,
Attila




-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Iñaki Baz 
Castillo
Sent: 21 August 2008 16:20
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] rfc3261 section 13.2.2.4: INVITE 2xx impacts

El Thursday 21 August 2008 17:14:41 Attila Sipos escribió:
> >>1) You receive a 180 wihout Contact and Record-Route.
> >>2) Later a 183:
> >>3) Later a 183:
> >>4) Later a 200:
>
> Question:
> Are your four responses on the same fork?

Yes. In other case (if there are replies from different forks) then each fork 
will create a dialog (early/confirmed) in the UAC. For each dialog the 
explained rules would apply independetly.

--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Iñaki Baz 
Castillo
Sent: 21 August 2008 15:36
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] rfc3261 section 13.2.2.4: INVITE 2xx impacts

El Thursday 21 August 2008 16:15:25 Brett Tate escribió:
> Is the following what rfc3261 is attempting to communicate?

I think so but just a question:

> 1) Dialog forming INVITE 1xx/2xx creates route set based upon 
> record-route and sets remote target per Contact.
>
> 2) Original INVITE's subsequent 101-199 has no impact upon a known 
> dialog's route set and remote target.
>
> 3) Original INVITE's 2xx resets route set per received/missing 
> record-route and does not set (or update) per Contact.
>
> 4) Retargeting (excluding original INVITE) request's 2xx within dialog 
> allow the remote target to be updated.


1) You receive a 180 wihout Contact and Record-Route.

2) Later a 183:
     Record-Route: <sip:server1>
     
3) Later a 183:
      Record-Route: <sip:server2>
      Contact: sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

4) Later a 200:
      Record-Route: <sip:server3>
      Contact: sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


So the dialog data for the UAC will be:
- route set: <sip:server3>
- remote target: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Explanation:
1) route set and remote target is null:
- route set: null
- remote target: null

2) Is a 1xx with "RR" so sets route set:
- route set: <sip:server1>
- remote target: null

3) Is a 1xx with "Contact" and "RR". remote set is not updated since it already 
exists. Sets remote target:
- route set: <sip:server1>
- remote target: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
4) Is a 2xx with "Contact" and "RR". route set is updated since it's a 2xx. 
remote target is not updated since it already exists.
- route set: <sip:server3>
- remote target: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Is it correct? In this case... WHY IS SIP SOOOOOOO COMPLEX???



--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to