> -----Original Message----- > From: Juha Heinanen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 2:14 PM > > Hadriel Kaplan writes: > > > > so it the responsibility of > > > the UA to use a short reg int if it is behind NAT and does not > support > > > CRLF. > > > > I know in the prefect world all UA's are "smart" and up on the latest > > specs and do the right thing. > > i would like to add to this that in order for your proxy to be able to > do its "smarts" and reduce the reg int of the UA, the UA would first > need to implement this brand new keep draft (if you want to avoid > reducing reg int for vain). it is easier for the UA to simply implement > CRLF capability without the keep draft like some and growing number are > already doing.
Yes, it is easier for a UAC to simply send double-CRLF than to also insert a semi-colon plus a 4-character string into its Via header. I'm not arguing it isn't easier to avoid doing that. All I'm saying is if the UA decides to avoid that huge computational overhead of sending a keep param, it may find itself sending SIP REGISTER requests far more often than it has to, or receiving SIP OPTIONS requests, or getting blacklisted, or whatever. My simple cave-man brain tells me that may result in more work for the UA in the end than if it simply sent the incredibly complicated keep param to begin with, but I don't write clients so maybe not. -hadriel _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
