The questions are similar to the ones Harbhanu asked back in May. When the UPDATE 2xx occurs, the timer/refresher is calculated based upon UPDATE 2xx. When the INVITE 2xx occurs, the timer/refresher is calculated based upon INVITE 2xx.
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/sip-implementors/2010-May/025009.html http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip/current/msg27736.html > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:sip- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of shyam > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 6:30 AM > To: 'SIP Satan'; 'Ravi Kumar' > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Regarding Rfc 4028 > > What should be the Final session refresh timer here? > > 1600 or 1800 ? > > The UE has changed the session-refresher timer to 1600 from initial > 1800. > But the UA is responding with 1800 as final session-expires. > The RFC states that the final session-expires time interval can not be > greater than the initial time interval. > > Thanks, > Shyam > > *********************************************************************** > ***** > *********** > This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from > HUAWEI, > which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed > above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way > (including, > but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or > dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is > prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the > sender by > phone or email immediately and delete it! > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > SIP > Satan > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 3:44 PM > To: Ravi Kumar > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Regarding Rfc 4028 > > Ideal situation is UPDATE can carry same value for SE as INVITE's, > Other > option is UAS can overwrite session timer values with the latest > received > one (of UPDATE's) and both 200 OK of UPDATE and INVITE can carry the > updated one. > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Ravi Kumar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > From: Ravi Kumar [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 7:27 PM > > To: ''[email protected]' > > Subject: Regarding Rfc 4028 > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > I have call flow Like below. > > > > > > > > UE UE > > > > > > > > | | > > > > --------Inv----------> (Session Expire: 1800) > > > > | | > > > > <----------183----- > > > > | | > > > > ------update------->(Session Expire: 1600) > > > > | | > > > > <-------200-update (Session Expire: 1600;refresher=uas) > > > > | | > > > > <-------200-Inv--- (Session Expire: 1800;refresher=uas) > > > > | | > > > > > > > > Doubt: > > > > 1. When UAC is negotiating session timer value with INVITE > > request, and session timer negotiation is not completed then UAC > should > not > > start negotiation with UPDATE request. Because this behavior not > defined > by > > RFC-4028. How does other implementation handles this at UAS side. > > > > And UAC should send UPDATE request with Session Expire > header > > when INVITE negotiation is not completed. > > > > 2. Can UPDATE request start Session timer negotiation, > because > > it is used for session timer refresher? > > > > 3. What does RFC-4028 last response mean? _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
