On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 11:08 -0400, Dale Worley wrote: > On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 16:43 -0400, Kathleen Eccles wrote: > > Fixing this issue requires changing how we select proxy responses. > > I propose the following behavior: > > > > 1 - Responses from outside the proxy should be preferred over responses > > generated internally by the proxy. > > Does the proxy generate any response internally other than 408 for > timeout? Yes, it can generate 487 responses by cancelling forks on its own. Also, we should prefer non-sipx responses to those returned from the registrar ( so any upstream response would have precedence over a 404 from the registrar.) > <snip>
> We need to ensure that responses that imply ways to recover from failure > have a high priority. 401, 407, and 491 are the usual candidates for > this treatment. ok > <snip> > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Case 1- Simply don't answer call to 272. > > Result:404 response is sent to caller(271), > > Preferred response: 408 > > > > Details: > > - 272 rings for approx 30 seconds. > > - After 30 secs, 404 response is sent to caller(271) and > > - Cancel is sent for invite to 272 and > > - 408 response is generated and consumed within proxy for 272 fork(s). > > It seems to me that 487 Canceled would be preferable, although I don't > know if we can cause that to happen. But I see 487 as indicating "ring > no answer" as well as "caller canceled call". Ring no answer currently causes 408. Do we want to substitue 487 in this case? -ke _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
