Re: [Sip] draft-gunn-sip-req-for-rph-in-responses-00: What is impact on response?

Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com> Wed, 21 November 2007 22:11 UTC

Return-path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iuxml-0006zK-02; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:11:07 -0500
Received: from sip by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Iuxmh-0006vc-Jh for sip-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:11:03 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iuxmh-0006vT-5G for sip@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:11:03 -0500
Received: from nylon.softarmor.com ([66.135.38.164]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iuxmg-00048V-QP for sip@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:11:03 -0500
Received: from [192.168.1.4] (65-65-155-30.dsl.bigbend.net [65.65.155.30] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by nylon.softarmor.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id lALMAxLE004847 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 21 Nov 2007 16:11:01 -0600
In-Reply-To: <XFE-SJC-212KAe2hXSD000013ad@xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com>
References: <F69F586E-9B9D-41E1-B54C-E60998E7ADBF@softarmor.com> <XFE-SJC-212KAe2hXSD000013ad@xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <5A8C011C-2D22-44F7-B98A-47CC81C97F8E@softarmor.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
Subject: Re: [Sip] draft-gunn-sip-req-for-rph-in-responses-00: What is impact on response?
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 16:10:53 -0600
To: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f
Cc: IETF SIP List <sip@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.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://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org

On Nov 21, 2007, at 3:22 PM, James M. Polk wrote:
>> If the
>> RPH value is not resent, then the RPH value would cease to apply.
>
> This isn't stated, but I think once a priority is established  
> within a dialog, it doesn't cease because a new transaction within  
> that dialog didn't contain the same namespace.priority-value.  But  
> I do expect any new transaction to contain at least the same RPH  
> values as the existing dialog.

If RPH can change on a per-message cycle within a dialog, is the  
transmission of a message without an RPH header within the dialog the  
same as explicitly sending an RPH that conveys no priority? This  
needs to be clear in the documentation.

--
dean


_______________________________________________
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