The reported error does not sound correct. If RFC 4028 is incorrect concerning From tag, so is RFC 3261 (section 8.1 and likely other sections) and various other RFCs.
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of RFC > Errata System > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 12:37 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: [Sip] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4028 (1681) > > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4028, > "Session Timers in the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4028&eid=1681 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Technical > Reported by: Muthu Arul Mozhi <[email protected]> > > Section: 13 > > Original Text > ------------- > In section 13 (Example Call Flow) the From tag never changes > between the initial INVITE message and the subsequent INVITE > messages sent after receiving a 422: > > message 1 > INVITE sips:[email protected] SIP/2.0 > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS pc33.atlanta.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKnashds8 > Supported: timer > Session-Expires: 50 > Max-Forwards: 70 > To: Bob <sips:[email protected]> > From: Alice <sips:[email protected]>;tag=1928301774 > Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710 > CSeq: 314159 INVITE > Contact: <sips:[email protected]> > Content-Type: application/sdp > Content-Length: 142 > > message 4 > INVITE sips:[email protected] SIP/2.0 > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS pc33.atlanta.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKnashds9 > Supported: timer > Session-Expires: 3600 > Min-SE: 3600 > Max-Forwards: 70 > To: Bob <sips:[email protected]> > From: Alice <sips:[email protected]>;tag=1928301774 > Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710 > CSeq: 314160 INVITE > Contact: <sips:[email protected]> > Content-Type: application/sdp > Content-Length: 142 > > message 10 > INVITE sips:[email protected] SIP/2.0 > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS pc33.atlanta.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKnashds10 > Supported: timer > Session-Expires: 4000 > Min-SE: 4000 > Max-Forwards: 70 > To: Bob <sips:[email protected]> > From: Alice <sips:[email protected]>;tag=1928301774 > Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710 > CSeq: 314161 INVITE > Contact: <sips:[email protected]> > Content-Type: application/sdp > > However, as per RFC 3261, if an initial INVITE generates a non-2xx final > response, that terminates all sessions and all dialogs that were created. > > Hence, these are not re-INVITE messages, rather new INVITE messages and > should use a new From tag. > > Corrected Text > -------------- > message 1 > INVITE sips:[email protected] SIP/2.0 > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS pc33.atlanta.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKnashds8 > Supported: timer > Session-Expires: 50 > Max-Forwards: 70 > To: Bob <sips:[email protected]> > From: Alice <sips:[email protected]>;tag=1928301774 > Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710 > CSeq: 314159 INVITE > Contact: <sips:[email protected]> > Content-Type: application/sdp > Content-Length: 142 > > message 4 > INVITE sips:[email protected] SIP/2.0 > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS pc33.atlanta.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKnashds9 > Supported: timer > Session-Expires: 3600 > Min-SE: 3600 > Max-Forwards: 70 > To: Bob <sips:[email protected]> > From: Alice <sips:[email protected]>;tag=2568701785 > Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710 > CSeq: 314160 INVITE > Contact: <sips:[email protected]> > Content-Type: application/sdp > Content-Length: 142 > > message 10 > INVITE sips:[email protected] SIP/2.0 > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS pc33.atlanta.example.com;branch=z9hG4bKnashds10 > Supported: timer > Session-Expires: 4000 > Min-SE: 4000 > Max-Forwards: 70 > To: Bob <sips:[email protected]> > From: Alice <sips:[email protected]>;tag=5647301796 > Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710 > CSeq: 314161 INVITE > Contact: <sips:[email protected]> > Content-Type: application/sdp > > Notes > ----- > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat (pkyzivat) > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 10:09 PM > To: Muthu ArulMozhi Perumal (mperumal) > Cc: Radha Krishna Saragadam (rsaragad); Jonathan Rosenberg (jdrosen); Ram > Mohan R (rmohanr) > Subject: Re: UAS behavior after sending 422 for initial INVITE > > yes, I think so. > > Paul > > Muthu ArulMozhi Perumal (mperumal) wrote: > > In section 13 (Example Call Flow) of RFC 4028 the From tag never changes > > between the initial INVITE message and the subsequent INVITE messages > > sent after receiving a 422: > > > > message 1 > > INVITE sips:[email protected] SIP/2.0 > > From: Alice <sips:[email protected]>;tag=1928301774 > > Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710 > > > > message 4 > > INVITE sips:[email protected] SIP/2.0 > > From: Alice <sips:[email protected]>;tag=1928301774 > > Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710 > > > > message 10 > > INVITE sips:[email protected] SIP/2.0 > > From: Alice <sips:[email protected]>;tag=1928301774 > > Call-ID: a84b4c76e66710 > > > > Is this a bug in the RFC? > > > > thanks, > > Muthu > > > > |-----Original Message----- > > |From: Paul Kyzivat (pkyzivat) > > |Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 12:36 AM > > |To: Radha Krishna Saragadam (rsaragad) > > |Cc: Jonathan Rosenberg (jdrosen); Muthu ArulMozhi Perumal (mperumal); > > Ram Mohan R (rmohanr) > > |Subject: Re: UAS behavior after sending 422 for initial INVITE > > | > > |Radha, > > | > > |It is not a reinvite, because a dialog was never established - the > > first > > |call failed. > > | > > |So you are starting a new invite. You can use the same callid, but > > |should use a new from-tag. > > | > > | Thanks, > > | Paul > > | > > |Radha Krishna Saragadam (rsaragad) wrote: > > |> Hi Paul > > |> > > |> My question is for initial INVITE. For initial INVITE if UA > > |> receives 422 and UA want to retry INVITE with new value increased > > value > > |> then what should be the To(with tag), From(with tag) and CallID > > values? > > |> Is it a Re-INVITE or new a Dialog? Section 7.3 says same value for > > |> To,From and CallID > > |> > > |> Regards > > |> S.Radha krishna > > Instructions: > ------------- > This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC4028 (draft-ietf-sip-session-timer-15) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Session Timers in the Session Initiation Protocol > (SIP) > Publication Date : April 2005 > Author(s) : S. Donovan, J. Rosenberg > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Session Initiation Protocol > Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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
