RE: [Sip] Comments on draft-kaplan-sip-info-events-00

Working backwards through my mailbox, and I guess I should have read this first.

Yes, what I had in mind was the non-delivery of packets, e.g. for the reason of non-sequential delivery.

SIP will not tell you you have missed any packets in this case.

Regards

Keith 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] 
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 7:31 PM
> To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
> Cc: sip@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Sip] Comments on draft-kaplan-sip-info-events-00
> 
> Keith,
> 
> A comment about one of your points:
> 
> DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
> 
> > In particular, one area which needs to be covered is how 
> the embedded 
> > information tranfer caters for out of sequence delivery, given that 
> > the carriage mechanism does not guarantee order of delivery in all 
> > circumstances of SIP usage.
> 
> I'm wondering what you have in mind here.
> 
> It is possible to send request R1 then send R2 before getting 
> a response to R1. And then it is possible for R2 to arrive 
> before R1, and in that case it will be accepted. But then, 
> when R1 arrives there will be a CSeq error so it will be rejected.
> 
> The end result is that you can get *nondelivery* of a 
> message, but not *out of order delivery*.
> 
> 	Thanks,
> 	Paul
> 

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip