Re: [martini] #59: Reg-Event Issues

"martini issue tracker" <> Wed, 22 September 2010 23:01 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49A123A67A3 for <>; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 16:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.571
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.571 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.029, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a1q6Fb0OxVrt for <>; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 16:01:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::2a]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62AC23A6804 for <>; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 16:01:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1] by with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <>) id 1OyYK6-00046w-1R; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 16:01:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: "martini issue tracker" <>
X-Trac-Version: 0.11.7
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.11.7, by Edgewall Software
X-Trac-Project: martini
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 23:01:58 -0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 59
In-Reply-To: <>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Subject: Re: [martini] #59: Reg-Event Issues
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
List-Id: Discussion of en-mass SIP PBX registration mechanisms <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 23:01:31 -0000

#59: Reg-Event Issues
 Reporter:  D.Hancock@…              |        Owner:  adam@…          
     Type:  defect                   |       Status:  closed          
 Priority:  major                    |    Milestone:  milestone1      
Component:  gin                      |      Version:  1.0             
 Severity:  In WG Last Call          |   Resolution:  fixed           
 Keywords:                           |  
Changes (by adam@…):

  * status:  new => closed
  * resolution:  => fixed


 Issue 1 -- Good catch. Added:

           If the SIP-PBX is not registered with the
           SSP when a registration event subscription for a contact
           that would be implicitly registered if the SIP-PBX were
           registered, the the SSP SHOULD accept the subscription
           and indicate that the user is not currently registered.
           Once the associated SIP-PBX is registered, the SSP
           SHOULD use the subcription migration mechanism defined
           in RFC 3265 to migrate the subscription to the SIP-PBX.

 Issue 2 -- This is out of scope for GIN or even MARTINI. The answer is
 completely identical to the answer that would be given without GIN or any
 MARTINI-associated mechanism.

 Issue 3 -- This is a shortcoming in RFC 3680, as we are defining both
 state agents and rational reasons to fork subscriptions. In fact, 3680
 doesn't prohibit '''forking''' of the subscriptions -- it prevents
 subscribers from establishing multiple dialogs. So I think that continuing
 to fork (whether to the SSP and to the SIP-PBX or to multiple SIP-PBXes
 with the same implicitly registered contact) is very much the Right Thing
 To Do [tm]. What I think we need to do is allow subscribers who understand
 the GIN architecture to accept multiple subscriptions if they wish to do
 so. Updating the document accordingly.

Ticket URL: <>
martini <>