2011/4/24 Vijay K. Gurbani <[email protected]>:
> See my follow-up response --- I meant that a received
> 6xx response *is* quarantined until other branches
> finish.  So either 6xx is the best response if all
> branches had a URI rooted in the invalid domain, or
> some other branch generated a better response.
>
>> This is, from the UAC point of view, if no branch replies 200 and
>> any branch replies 6XX then the UAC will receive such 6XX.
>
> The UAC does not know that a downstream proxy forked, and
> neither should it.  Regardless of whether the proxy used
> sequential or parallel forking, when the proxy sees a
> 6xx on one branch, it will send CANCELs on the remaining
> n-1 branches and return the best response.  If any of
> the other branches had a different URI than the invalid
> one you mention, then this becomes the best response.
> If all branches had the URI rooted in the invalid
> domain, then the best response is still the 6xx-class
> one.
>
> So I really do not understand the problem.  Things
> work as expected.

I the proxy does parallel forking and receives a 180 in branch-1 and
603 in branch-2, it would send a CANCEL for branch-2 and obtain a 487
from branch-2. Now it must choose the first final response (603 vs
487), which one? (I ask it because I'm not sure right now, I think 4xx
replies win, but I'm not sure).



-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<[email protected]>

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

Reply via email to