Again, this is very simple. The questions is "is the mininum 1 or 2".
Juha is arguing for 2. I'm fine with 2 also (in fact, that's how I read the spec in the first place). Which minimum is acceptable to you: a) 1 b) 2 c) Either but I prefer 1 d) Either but I prefer 2 > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 13:15 > To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); Juha Heinanen; Dean Willis > Cc: Hadriel Kaplan; [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > Elwell, John > Subject: RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-outbound > > Hi Francois, > > If you, as you propose, say: > > "If the set has more than one URI, the UAC MUST send a > REGISTER request to at least two of the default outbound > proxies from the set." > > ...do you then really need the sentence saying: > > "For each outbound proxy URI in the set, the UAC SHOULD send > a REGISTER request using this URI as the default outbound proxy." > > Wouldn't it be enough to say that the UAC MUST register with > at least two? > > I guess the question is whether UACs "with battery life > issues" want to be able to establish single flows or not. > Since the current draft does seem to allow it (at least it > doesn't explicitly forbid it) it could be rather unwise to > remove that possibility at this point, because it COULD be > seen as a rather big change. Maybe one solution would be to > strongly recommend against it, and add some words about the > lost functionality by doing so, but not explicitly forbid it. > > On the other hand, assuming the keep-draft moves forward: if > you are only going to establish a single flow I am not sure > you would need Outbound in the first place - keep would be enough :) > > Regards, > > Christer > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Francois Audet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Mon 12/05/2008 19:46 > To: Juha Heinanen; Dean Willis > Cc: Christer Holmberg; Hadriel Kaplan; [email protected]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Elwell, John > Subject: RE: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-outbound > > > > Let me try to summarize where we are at with the > draf-ietf-sip-outbound thread, and let's try to conclude. > > The current text says the following: > > At configuration time, UAs obtain one or more SIP URIs representing > the default outbound-proxy-set. This specification assumes the set > is determined via any of a number of configuration mechanisms, and > future specifications can define additional mechanisms > such as using > DNS to discover this set. How the UA is configured is outside the > scope of this specification. However, a UA MUST support > sets with at > least two outbound proxy URIs and SHOULD support sets with > up to four > URIs. > > For each outbound proxy URI in the set, the UAC SHOULD send a > REGISTER request using this URI as the default outbound proxy. > (Alternatively, the UA could limit the number of flows formed to > conserve battery power, for example). UAs that support this > specification MUST include the outbound option tag in a Supported > header field in a REGISTER request. Each of these > REGISTER requests > will use a unique Call-ID. Forming the route set for the > request is > outside the scope of this document, but typically results > in sending > the REGISTER such that the topmost Route header field contains a > loose route to the outbound proxy URI. > > What Juha is worried about is that there is enough wiggle > room in there that some UAs will not register with the > minimum of 2. It is true that it is unclear if the text > about battery life was meant to allow for not registering > with all the entries in the route set, but still keep the > minimum of two, or not. > > I propose is that the text would look like this: > > At configuration time, UAs obtain one or more SIP URIs representing > the default outbound-proxy-set. This specification assumes the set > is determined via any of a number of configuration mechanisms, and > future specifications can define additional mechanisms > such as using > DNS to discover this set. How the UA is configured is outside the > scope of this specification. However, a UA MUST support > sets with at > least two outbound proxy URIs and SHOULD support sets with > up to four > URIs. > > For each outbound proxy URI in the set, the UAC SHOULD send a > REGISTER request using this URI as the default outbound proxy. > (Alternatively, the UA could limit the number of flows formed to > conserve battery power, for example). If the set has more than one > URI, the UAC MUST send a REGISTER request to at least two of the > default outbound proxies from the set. UAs that support > this specification > MUST include the outbound option tag in a Supported header > field in a > REGISTER request. Each of these REGISTER requests will > use a unique > Call-ID. Forming the route set for the request is outside > the scope of this > document, but typically results in sending the REGISTER > such that the > topmost Route header field contains a loose route to the outbound > proxy URI. > > I think this is reasonable. Basically, what this boils down > to is very simple: > is the minimum number of registration for a proxy set that is > bigger than one 2 or 1. > If you are against this proposal, it it is presumably because > you believe a UA should be allowed to use only ONE proxy from > the set and ignore the second one. > > I'd like to get opinions from the list, and close on the issue. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ 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
