See inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:sip- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Jerell > Billings > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 2:57 PM > To: Dale Worley > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Sip Forking > > So, from the (originating) UAC standpoint, if the proxy was very > passive > about this sort of thing, and it passed multiple responses back to the > UAC > (maybe two devices sent 180/183 messages , and another device sent > 302), > then the originating UAC would treat the 302 as a final response and > CANCEL > the other calls that it has seen activity from? > Thanks. [Neel]
The proxy should do the CANCEL. Before proxy forwards the final response (all 2XX, 3XX, 4XX, 5XX and 6XX are final response), it should CANCEL all the forked INVITE. > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:22 PM, Dale Worley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 10:06 -0500, Jerell Billings wrote: > > > If a request is forked by a proxy, and one of the recipients of the > > request > > > issues a redirect (302 user elsewhere), will that be handled by the > proxy > > or > > > will it be passed on to the UAC who initiated the request. > > > > The proxy may choose whether to "recurse" (handle the Contacts > itself), > > or to send the 302 as a response to the request it received. It can > > also handle some of the Contacts itself, delete them from the 302 > > response, and send the reduced 302 as a response to the request it > > received. > > > > Usually proxies act on 302 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
