IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Sip] Possible bug in "Non-INVITE Client Transaction" - 17.1.2.2

Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Fri, 08 April 2011 07:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
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 7D9AC3A6A56 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 00:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.643
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.643 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 Czcze6xeMZ5F for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 00:54:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com (mail-qy0-f179.google.com [209.85.216.179]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1CE43A6A28 for <sip@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 00:54:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk7 with SMTP id 7so2142364qyk.10 for <sip@ietf.org>; Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.75.196 with SMTP id z4mr1438403qcj.277.1302249404545; Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.35.72 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 00:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4CE3ABC5-E50D-4EA9-B8C1-09991BC00E0A@softarmor.com>
References: <BANLkTimgohzMAtinJutHfeDRETduGzjZvg@mail.gmail.com> <4CE3ABC5-E50D-4EA9-B8C1-09991BC00E0A@softarmor.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 09:56:44 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTin-5OBTgn08tccUSt6Av_mAkiorzw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
To: Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: sip@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sip] Possible bug in "Non-INVITE Client Transaction" - 17.1.2.2
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 07:55:00 -0000

2011/4/8 Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>:
> I think you're right that the spec is written incorrectly. I believe it should describe that the multiplier on T1 doubles with each reset. This is not clear in the existing text. So for example, if 8*T1 < T2, then the third reset is 8*T1, and if 16*T1 < T2, then the 4th reset is 16*T2
>
> Otherwise said, MIN(2^N*T1,T2) where N is the repetition iterator.

That would clarify it, right.


>> PS: Sorry for the cross-posting, I don't know which maillist is better
>> to report it.
>
> sipcore@ietf.org would probably be the right place.

Finally I've reported an errata for RFC 3261 (hope it's also a good place):

  http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3261


Thanks a lot.

-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email