I honestly don't know why anybody would want to do both UDP and TCP.
 
(In other words, if you set up a TCP flow, I don't see a benefit in also 
setting up a UDP flow which you will have to maintain for keep alives).
 


________________________________

        From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563
        Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 07:46
        To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); [email protected]; [email protected]; 
[email protected]
        Subject: Re: [Sip] Question on draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20 draft: 
multipleflowcreation
        
        
        Hi
         
        Thanks for the reply..One more of clarification required..
         
        So If UA wishes to create multiple transport flows with 
"sip:primary.example.com"(As specified in draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20#section-13 
to honor RFC3261 requirement for message size greater than MTU), would it be OK 
it one FLOW lands on Host1 and other FLOW lands on Host2?
         
        i.e for example if "sip:primary.example.com" got resolved into (IP1, 
Port1, TCP) -> (IP2, Port2, TCP) -> (IP2, Port2, UDP) -> (IP1, Port1, UDP) in 
that order, and if UA wises to create both TCP and UDP FLOWs with 
"sip:primary.example.com", then it starts creating TCP FLOW with (IP1, Port1, 
TCP) and can create a UDP FLOW with (IP2, Port2, UDP) based on RFC 3263 
procedures. Is my understanding correct here? 
         
        In the above example, if (IP1) is down/crashed for some reasons, then 
"sip:primary.example.com", can never use the TCP FLOW for transporting inbound 
messages to that UA (Even though the IP1 and IP2 are state synchronized) until 
User Agent detects the FLOW failure with (IP1) and re-create the TCP FLOW with 
(IP1 or IP2). Is my understanding correct here?
         
        Please clarify..
         
        Regard
        Srikanth

________________________________

        From: Francois Audet [mailto:[email protected]] 
        Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 9:22 PM
        To: Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563; [email protected]
        Subject: RE: [Sip] Question on draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20 draft: 
multiple flowcreation
        
        
        You would have 2. One for primary, and one for secondary. For each one 
of those, you would use normal RFC 3263 procedures for determining which SRV 
record to use.


________________________________

                From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563
                Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 07:57
                To: [email protected]
                Subject: [Sip] Question on draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20 draft: 
multiple flowcreation
                
                
                Hi
                 
                As specified in section 3.3/3.4 of draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20 
draft, If a UA is configured with a outbound-proxy-set with two proxy uris: 
"sip:primary.example.com" and "sip:secondary.example.com" And for example, 
"sip:primary.example.com" got DNS resolved in to two SRV records "Host1" and 
"Host2" and "sip:secondary.example.com" got DNS resolved in to "Host3" and 
"Host4", Should UA create four FLOWs, One with each host OR just two FLOWs, one 
with each proxy URI(i.e one flow with either Host1 or Host2 and second flow 
with Host3 or Host4)?
                 
                Please clarify.
                 
                Regards
                Srikanth

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to