On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Dale Worley <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 17:31 +0000, Gabor Paller wrote: > >> After this message, however, 202 Accepted does not arrive but SipX >> immediately returns a NOTIFY. >> > >> This confuses the JAIN-SIP stack, as there is no SUBSCRIBE dialog >> established, the NOTIFY goes into the void and cannot be responded to. >> >> Eventually the 202 arrives. > >> >> Shouldn't 202 Accepted arrive first? The application and the server are >> located on the same machine, I can't imagine that this is caused by >> network delay. > > There are a couple of odd things here. > > First, since this is a re-SUBSCRIBE, the subscription should already > exist independently of the status of the re-SUBSCRIBE transaction, and > the stack should accept the NOTIFY based on that existing subscription. > (The exception would be if the sending of the re-SUBSCRIBE was so close > to the end of the subscription that the subscription had timed-out after > the re-SUBSCRIBE was sent but before the NOTIFY arrives.)
This does all point to a bug in the stack NOTIFY processing. I can volunteer to assign myself an XTRN issue and look at it. ETA would be about a week. Ranga > > Second, even if this is a new subscription, the subscriber must be > prepared to see the NOTIFY before the final response to the SUBSCRIBE: > RFC 3265, section 3.1.4.4, "Due to the potential for both out-of-order > messages and forking, the subscriber MUST be prepared to receive NOTIFY > messages before the SUBSCRIBE transaction has completed." > > Dale > > > _______________________________________________ > sipx-users mailing list > [email protected] > List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users > Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users > -- M. Ranganathan _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
