> It's very easy to dictate what RFC 3261 says. However, why don't > we recognize at last that 503 mechanism *doesn't* work at all?
The 503 works great to trigger advancing to next rfc3263 target. I agree that 503 with Retry-After isn't a perfect or complete solution for overload. As you mentioned, RFC 5390 exists along with the various drafts attempting to meet some/all of the requirements. <snip> > So for me, all the text in RFC 3261/3263 about 503 doesn't exist > as it designed to work in a happy universe so far from here. The 503 works; the issue with the 503 containing Retry-After. _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
