Thanks for your fast answers! Is there any RFC statements regarding the fact that UAS should ignore the malformed ACK? I have to persuade the UAS implementor! Thanks
Andrea 2015-04-03 11:04 GMT+02:00 Alok Tiwari <alo...@globallogic.com>: > Hi Andrea, > UAS should simply ignore the malformed ACK messages. Since the ACK message > is malformed, UAS will re-transmit the 400 response of INVITE for 32 > seconds. > > Thanks, > Alok Tiwari > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Andrea <fuffa...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> we are facing an issue where a malformed INVITE generate a message storm >> (loop). >> UAC send a malformed INVITE to UAS (from and contact header invalid) >> UAS replies with error 400 bad request >> UAC send a malformed ACK to UAS (from and contact header invalid) >> UAS replies with error 400 bad request in response to the malformed ACK >> UAC send a malformed ACK to UAS in response to the latest 400 bad req >> and the loop continues.... >> >> this generate a message storm that is consuming cpu resources for 32 >> seconds. >> >> >> I looked for specific RFCs but I cannot find something clear. >> So, the question: is it admitted that the UAS replies to the ACK with a >> 400 >> bad request or it should simply ignore the malformed ACK? >> >> >> Thanks in advance >> >> >> Andrea >> _______________________________________________ >> Sip-implementors mailing list >> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors >> > > > > -- > Alok Tiwari | Consultant > GlobalLogic > P +91.120.406.2000 x 2477 M +91.991.034.7139 S alo...@globallogic.com > <http://alok.t_globallogic.com/> > www.globallogic.com > <http://www.globallogic.com/> > http://www.globallogic.com/email_disclaimer.txt > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
