[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>    From: "V.S.R Kumar Kadimcherla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
>    When a stateful proxy has received 302 responses from all the down
>    stream client transactions and received some contacts in those
>    responses then proxy is sending 300 response to the upstream by
>    appending the all contacts received in 302 responses in to the
>    contact header field. Proxy is not looking for any duplication of
>    contacts before forwarding the 300 response. Is it a valid
>    behavior?
> 
>    Elimination of duplicate entries is duty of the proxy or end point
>    has to take care of this?
> 
> I don't think that RFC 3261 even allows a proxy to aggregate 3xx
> responses it receives into one 3xx response to send upstream,

Why not?

This is just like any other case of a proxy aggregating responses, such 
as authentication challenges.

In reality, when the proxy aggregates responses, what it is really doing 
is forking to itself as a UA, and then the UA part of the proxy is 
generating a final response. In that capacity it can return a 3xx 
response with any contacts it wants in it. Its just a happy coincidence 
that they are the equivalent of aggregating the Contacts from the 3xx's 
the proxy received.

        Paul

> but it
> does seem to be the correct thing to do if the proxy does not want to
> implement 3xx on its own.  (But it's not clear why it wouldn't since
> the proxy already implements forking.)
> 
> IIRC, a SIP element that does forking is required to not sent multiple
> requests to the same target URI regardless of how the target set is
> constructed, so it should be ignoring duplicate Contact values in any
> 3xx it receives.  So it seems that it is safe for the aggregating
> proxy to not check for duplicate Contacts.  But a forking proxy
> already must implement the URI-comparison operation, so it shouldn't
> be hard for it to delete duplicates as it is aggregating 3xx
> responses.
> 
> Dale
> _______________________________________________
> 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