Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199
"Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens.com> Wed, 07 January 2009 17:22 UTC
Return-Path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sip-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-sip-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6D5C3A6951; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:22:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5893D3A6951 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:22:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.535
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.535 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.064, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ETjeqKbPpsDA for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:22:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailgate.siemenscomms.co.uk (mailgate.siemenscomms.co.uk [195.171.110.225]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3C93A6802 for <sip@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:22:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from GBNTHT12009MSX.gb002.siemens.net ([137.223.219.235]) by siemenscomms.co.uk (PMDF V6.3-x14 #31430) with ESMTP id <0KD4006E92X0SY@siemenscomms.co.uk> for sip@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:22:12 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:22:12 +0000
From: "Elwell, John" <john.elwell@siemens.com>
In-reply-to: A <CA9998CD4A020D418654FCDEF4E707DF0A3D592E@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, sip@ietf.org
Message-id: <0D5F89FAC29E2C41B98A6A762007F5D0016B395D@GBNTHT12009MSX.gb002.siemens.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Thread-Topic: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199
Thread-Index: AclwpMa2gVaTl0oqRZ+oKLyml2UY7wAEccgwAAJTriAACo7ZIA==
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
References: A <CA9998CD4A020D418654FCDEF4E707DF0A392F09@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se> <0D5F89FAC29E2C41B98A6A762007F5D00167DF83@GBNTHT12009MSX.gb002.siemens.net> A <CA9998CD4A020D418654FCDEF4E707DF0A3D592E@esealmw113.eemea.ericsson.se>
Subject: Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: sip-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org
Christer, > >>"When a forking proxy receives a non-2xx final response which > >>terminates one or more (if forking has occured downstream a final > >>response received by the forking proxy MAY terminate multiple early > >>dialogs), and the proxy does not intend to forward the > >>final response immedialetly (due to the rules for a forking proxy), > and > >>the UAC has indicated support of the 199 response code, the proxy > >>SHOULD generate and send a 199 response upstream for the > early dialog > on which the > >>non-2xx final response was received, unless the proxy has > >>previously recieved and forwarded a 199 response for the dialog." > > > >Wow! We really must shorten this sentence. In particular I > >don't like including a second normative sentence in > >parentheses within the main sentence. > > I can try to think of more simple wording. > > And, text suggestions are of course always welcome :) > How about: "When a forking proxy receives a non-2xx final response that terminates one or more early dialogs, if the proxy does not intend to forward the final response immediately (in accordance with rules for a forking proxy) and the UAC has indicated support for the 199 response code, the proxy SHOULD generate and send a 199 response upstream for each early dialog terminated on the downstream side by the non-2xx final response, except for any early dialog for which the proxy has previously received and forwarded a 199 response. Note that if forking has also occurred downstream of the forking proxy, a final response received by the forking proxy can terminate multiple early dialogs." I have removed the normative statement that was in parentheses and created a separate sentence at the end. However, I believe it does not need to be normative - it is just a statement of something that arises because of the normative provisions of RFC 3261. I believe the proxy should send a 199 response on EACH affected early dialog (unless 199 already sent). This too is reflected in my proposed rewording. I hope this helps. John _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.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
- [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Elwell, John
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Brett Tate
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Sanjay Sinha (sanjsinh)
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Elwell, John
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Doken, Serhad
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Kanumuri, Sreeram
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Christer Holmberg
- Re: [Sip] New version (-04) of draft-ietf-sip-199 Christer Holmberg