IETF Logo Mail Archive

[MMUSIC] [RFC4566] Increment of SDP session version when NO modification is made to the session data

"Anh Cao" <cdanh@tma.com.vn> Tue, 15 March 2016 02:04 UTC

Return-Path: <cdanh@tma.com.vn>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F49212D859; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 19:04:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jh_91zInae31; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 19:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.tma.com.vn (mail2.tma.com.vn [120.72.81.4]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDAD612D562; Mon, 14 Mar 2016 19:04:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail.tma.com.vn ([192.168.1.42]) by mail2.tma.com.vn (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u2F247GM009717 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 15 Mar 2016 09:04:08 +0700
Received: from cdanh ([137.116.158.93]) by smail.tma.com.vn (8.14.7/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u2F247GM005001 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 15 Mar 2016 09:04:07 +0700
From: Anh Cao <cdanh@tma.com.vn>
To: mmusic@ietf.org, mmusic-chairs@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 09:04:07 +0700
Message-ID: <003501d17e5e$f5750e90$e05f2bb0$@tma.com.vn>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0036_01D17E99.A1D45BC0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0
Thread-Index: AdF+Xt7qsqKqN0bWRm+5BkLI0MPTcw==
Content-Language: en-us
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (mail2.tma.com.vn [10.1.0.4]); Tue, 15 Mar 2016 09:04:08 +0700 (ICT)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.97.5 at mail2.tma.com.vn
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/OamxDFJkF2nTUdQLKmXuE5cKcws>
Subject: [MMUSIC] [RFC4566] Increment of SDP session version when NO modification is made to the session data
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mmusic/>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 02:04:13 -0000

Hi all

 

I am a new in SIP/SDP and I have a question about the session version of
SDP:

According to the  <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4566#page-11> RFC4566 item
5.2 : <sess-version> is a version number for this session description.  Its
usage is up to the creating tool, so long as <sess-version> is increased
when a modification is made to the session data.

So, If session data is NOT made any change, is session-version acceptable to
increase or it is NOT ?

 

I used SIPp tool (137.116.158.97) to check my SIP proxy (10.250.160.168) and
see that 200 OK INVITE and 200 OK re-INVITE have SDP data are the same but
session-version is increased by 1, and I'm not sure this behaivio of SIP
proxy is acceptable or not?

 

Thanks for reading my email. I highly appreciate your help.

 

Best regards,

Anh Cao

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email