[Sip] RE: Open Issue #138: to fork, or not to fork

It has been two weeks since I posted this. 

There were no responses. Since there was consensus on this at IETF, I will
now assume list consensus on this, and therefore close this open issue.

Thanks,
Jonathan R.

---
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                72 Eagle Rock Ave.
Chief Scientist                             First Floor
dynamicsoft                                 East Hanover, NJ 07936
jdrosen@dynamicsoft.com                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Rosenberg 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 7:14 PM
> To: 'sip@ietf.org'
> Subject: Open Issue #138: to fork, or not to fork
> 
> 
> Issue:
> 
> Do we deprecate forking for INVITE?
> 
> Do we deprecate forking for non-INVITE?
> 
> Points of discussion:
> 
> There was quick discussion on the first issue, followed by a 
> hum of consensus. THere was strong consensus to keep forking 
> of INVITE, with the notable exception of the esteemed chair, 
> Mr. Willis. There was agreement to close on this so that we 
> can stifle continued dsicussion of the subject on the list.
> 
> The second one is more complex. Forking of non-INVITE is 
> complex since the non-INVITE only generates a single 
> response. Forking makes sense when the things you fork to are 
> homogeneous and don't create state. Thus, speaking to any one 
> is fine. If state is created by the non-INVITE, and this 
> state needs to be managed, the non-INVITE has to have some 
> companion method that allows the "called party" to send a 
> request back towards the "caller" to indicate that a "leg" 
> was created there. 
> 
> We have encountered a need for this for SUBSCRIBE. It appears 
> to be useful to fork SUBSCRIBE, and so long as we use Adam's 
> proposed approach of constructing route sets and leg state 
> through the NOTIFY, it works fine. 
> 
> Proposal:
> 
> Continue to allow forking of non-INVITE.
> 
> There was consensus on this proposal.
> 
> -Jonathan R.
> 
> ---
> Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                72 Eagle Rock Ave.
> Chief Scientist                             First Floor
> dynamicsoft                                 East Hanover, NJ 07936
> jdrosen@dynamicsoft.com                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
> http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
> http://www.dynamicsoft.com
>  
> 

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  http://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