Re: [Sip] MUST 200 OK contain SDP? Thanks

" 孙永光 " <sammanengineer@gmail.com> Wed, 28 May 2008 00:34 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 5FEA73A6A20; Tue, 27 May 2008 17:34:16 -0700 (PDT)
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 D89B33A6894 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 May 2008 17:34:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.507
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, DEAR_SOMETHING=1.605, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
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 OAmVHd1RQOWK for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 May 2008 17:34:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com (fk-out-0910.google.com [209.85.128.188]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB1943A6A10 for <sip@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 May 2008 17:34:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 18so2457374fkq.5 for <sip@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 May 2008 17:34:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=Vr4ZdclEG03GIAgfBelNxXb1qhStY2t7V4AO7U/ufFo=; b=MjgILZx7UL8KRwCZOBpwBrqoP9jnf6lHvMgSa7tYSA7eoqecmOLDUcHruGbnk6hRj7k56qUAdgUBCZWjDe1qV2v+uNl+PuMWM9ORE27EpmB4UDLIc58FVefhnLON3cGMDUx0MJ4VwcubutWMDJENMa8xI+zBYgZvgaH4AoJIAKE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=F4cSCIxga5ZIjCO6WZrgZ7QfUxNCUF9lr3nJUKhGYtK+3wuoF6YHKkYN9uUV8rIkvaeoO7BUeysaPjsifdPgLk9UOb+B1CCSNZ2q4MQnSwwQdiEMJwDmvONbk/or+ZRyTT1QzkO3ioLeL0WQPd69LeK6wO9LYbAfnaGEJGRLeww=
Received: by 10.82.148.7 with SMTP id v7mr311009bud.4.1211934855669; Tue, 27 May 2008 17:34:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.82.149.18 with HTTP; Tue, 27 May 2008 17:34:15 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <2374a5fb0805271734h3df5f8ebu97273056293f8591@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 08:34:15 +0800
From: 孙永光 <sammanengineer@gmail.com>
To: Yuantao Zhang <yuantao.zhang@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <BAF5F619287DFA4F8BE069A8198CBBB201CA651F@ecnbjmw513.eapac.ericsson.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BAF5F619287DFA4F8BE069A8198CBBB201CA651F@ecnbjmw513.eapac.ericsson.se>
Cc: sip@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sip] MUST 200 OK contain SDP? Thanks
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-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/sip>
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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0533666888=="
Sender: sip-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Yuantao
   I'm SunYongGuang, my msn is yongguangsun@hotmail.com

it is ok,

        "If the initial offer is in an INVITE, the answer MUST be in a
        reliable non-failure message from UAS back to UAC which is
        correlated to that INVITE.  For this specification, that is
        only the final 2xx response to that INVITE. "
Does that mean if "Invite" contains SDP offer, "200 OK" MUST contain SDP
answer.
"the answer MUST be in a reliable non-failure message from UAS back to UAC
which is
  correlated to that INVITE" in your scenario  , the 180 with 100rel  is
reliable non-failure message and it includes SDP, the offer/answer is
completed, so the 200 response may include SDP or not, please refer RFC3262


2008/5/22, Yuantao Zhang <yuantao.zhang@ericsson.com>:
>
> Dear Sir or Madam
>
> I am an R&D engineer in Ericsson and really confused by the following
> part in RFC_3261. Could you please help us to explain it? Thank you very
> much.
> "
> 13.2.1 Creating the Initial INVITE
> .
> .
> .
>        If the initial offer is in an INVITE, the answer MUST be in a
>         reliable non-failure message from UAS back to UAC which is
>         correlated to that INVITE.  For this specification, that is
>         only the final 2xx response to that INVITE.  That same exact
>         answer MAY also be placed in any provisional responses sent
>         prior to the answer.  The UAC MUST treat the first session
>         description it receives as the answer, and MUST ignore any
>         session descriptions in subsequent responses to the initial
>         INVITE.
> .
> .
> ."
>
> Let's break it into 2 parts, in part 1,
>         "If the initial offer is in an INVITE, the answer MUST be in a
>         reliable non-failure message from UAS back to UAC which is
>         correlated to that INVITE.  For this specification, that is
>         only the final 2xx response to that INVITE. "
> Does that mean if "Invite" contains SDP offer, "200 OK" MUST contain SDP
> answer.
>
> In part 2,
>         "That same exact answer MAY also be placed in any provisional
> responses sent
>         prior to the answer.  The UAC MUST treat the first session
>         description it receives as the answer, and MUST ignore any
>         session descriptions in subsequent responses to the initial
>         INVITE."
> Does that mean if "Invite" contains SDP offer, the answer SDP MAY be in
> "180 ring" and not in "200 OK"? I think part 1 and part 2 are
> inconsistent.
>
> The attached sequence chart is the real problem we meet. Sx1 sends "bye"
> to sx2 after the "200 OK" because there is no SDP answer in "200 OK".
> But the producer of sx2 argues that the SDP answer is in "180 ring"
> already. No need to repeat it in "200 OK". Could you please tell me who
> is right? MUST 200 OK contain SDP? Thank you very much.
>
> Sx1                              xs2
>   ====1   invite(SDP)    ====>
> <====2   100 trying     ====
> <====3   180 ringing(SDP)====
>   ====4   prack          ====>
> <====5   200 ack        ====>
> <====6   200 OK (no SDP)====>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
> Yuantao Zhang
>
> I&V Engineer
> Broadband Networks R&D Center
> Ericsson (China) Company Ltd.
> Ericsson Tower          Phone :+86 10 8476 7240
> No. 5 Lize East Street          Internal:11240
> Chaoyang District               Fax     :+86 10 8476 7738
> Beijing 100102          Mobile :+86 13911606213
> P.R. China
> http://www.ericsson.com      e-mail :yuantao.zhang@ericsson.com
>
> ______________________________________________
> This communication is confidential and intended solely for the
> addressee(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution
> is prohibited. If you believe this message has been sent to you in
> error, please notify the sender by replying to this transmission and
> delete the message without disclosing it. Thank you.
> E-mail including attachments is susceptible to data corruption,
> interruption, unauthorized amendment, tampering and viruses, and we only
> send and receive e-mails on the basis that we are not liable for any
> such corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses or any
> consequences thereof.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 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