Re: draft-ietf-mmusic-sip-session-timer-00.txt

[Lewis McCarthy <[e-mail]>]

Jonathan Rosenberg writes:
> in a prior email I suggested
> that each proxy along the chain can decrease (but not increase) the
> value of the timer. The result is that the timer in the response
> represents the minimal refresh interval needed by all servers. By
> definition, this means that every server will receive a refresh in time
> (not true if servers are allowed to increase the interval).

Would there be a need in this approach to account for the delay 
introduced by the length of the chain?  Suppose the proxy farthest down 
the chain from the refreshing client happens to want the smallest 
timeout period T of all the proxies.  If the client waits about T time
before sending the refresh to the nearest proxy, the distant proxy's
timer may expire before it receives that refresh. 

-Lewis				http://www.cs.umass.edu/~lmccarth
-- 
"we have to yet really seriously debate the constitutional issues and 
whether or not we're willing to give up more freedom in order to have 
more security" -- U.S. Secretary of Defense William Cohen, 3 Feb 1999