Re: [Sip] SIP de-REGISTER: Expires header vs expires parameter i Contact
Neelakantan Balasubramanian <Bala_Neelakantan@Quintum.com> Tue, 20 January 2009 16:14 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 7D9DF28C0D9; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:14:34 -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 BD6B63A6B0E for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:14:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 uwngOhxWA1uS for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:14:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx03.net.com (mx03.net.com [134.56.3.133]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C03CA3A6929 for <sip@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:14:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx01-int.net.com (mx01-int.net.com [134.56.112.13]) by mx03.net.com (Switch-3.1.8/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id n0KGEAJr010988; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:14:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fmt-ex01.net.com (fmt-exchange [134.56.112.251]) by mx01-int.net.com (Switch-3.1.3/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id n0KG8ccH028301; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:08:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fmt-ex07.net.com ([134.56.113.16]) by fmt-ex01.net.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:19:39 -0800
Received: from fmt-qex01.quintum.com (134.56.116.12) by fmt-ex07.net.com (134.56.113.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.240.5; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:14:10 -0800
Received: from fmt-qex01.quintum.com ([134.56.116.12]) by fmt-qex01.quintum.com ([134.56.116.12]) with mapi; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:14:10 -0800
From: Neelakantan Balasubramanian <Bala_Neelakantan@Quintum.com>
To: Gert Olsson <gert.olsson@ericsson.com>, "sip@ietf.org" <sip@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:14:08 -0800
Thread-Topic: SIP de-REGISTER: Expires header vs expires parameter i Contact
Thread-Index: Acl6+jv/20UE0jY8SkKYLXKhRqw4sgAH7RKA
Message-ID: <87278613D061664392F2161B99567B870EF299098F@fmt-qex01.quintum.com>
References: <DA392F15190F9D40BF916AD7146E972E0BFDDF05@eseldmw101.eemea.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <DA392F15190F9D40BF916AD7146E972E0BFDDF05@eseldmw101.eemea.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Jan 2009 16:19:39.0466 (UTC) FILETIME=[E4CB3AA0:01C97B1A]
Subject: Re: [Sip] SIP de-REGISTER: Expires header vs expires parameter i Contact
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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1500445553=="
Sender: sip-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org
See RFC 3261 Section 10.2.1.1 10.2.1.1 Setting the Expiration Interval of Contact Addresses When a client sends a REGISTER request, it MAY suggest an expiration interval that indicates how long the client would like the registration to be valid. (As described in Section 10.3, the registrar selects the actual time interval based on its local policy.) There are two ways in which a client can suggest an expiration interval for a binding: through an Expires header field or an "expires" Contact header parameter. The latter allows expiration intervals to be suggested on a per-binding basis when more than one binding is given in a single REGISTER request, whereas the former suggests an expiration interval for all Contact header field values that do not contain the "expires" parameter. Thanks, Neel. From: sip-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gert Olsson Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 6:26 AM To: sip@ietf.org Subject: [Sip] SIP de-REGISTER: Expires header vs expires parameter i Contact Hi, SIP de-registration is performed by sending a REGISTER message with either a Contact header containing an 'expires=0' parameter or an Expires header with value 0. My question is: is it FORBIDDEN to have both? Shouldn't any decent server, if it has found 'expires=0' in the Contact header (or in all if many), just happily ignore an Expires header? [Neelakantan Bala] See RFC 3261 Section 10.2.1.1 10.2.1.1 Setting the Expiration Interval of Contact Addresses When a client sends a REGISTER request, it MAY suggest an expiration interval that indicates how long the client would like the registration to be valid. (As described in Section 10.3, the registrar selects the actual time interval based on its local policy.) There are two ways in which a client can suggest an expiration interval for a binding: through an Expires header field or an "expires" Contact header parameter. The latter allows expiration intervals to be suggested on a per-binding basis when more than one binding is given in a single REGISTER request, whereas the former suggests an expiration interval for all Contact header field values that do not contain the "expires" parameter. Thanks, Neel. br /GO __________________________________________________________________| Gert Olsson / phone: +46 10 7154604 / e-mail: gert.olsson@ericsson.com Ericsson AB - Business Unit Mobile Platforms, SE-221 83 Lund, Sweden
_______________________________________________ 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] SIP de-REGISTER: Expires header vs expires … Gert Olsson
- Re: [Sip] SIP de-REGISTER: Expires header vs expi… Neelakantan Balasubramanian
- Re: [Sip] SIP de-REGISTER: Expires header vs expi… Gert Olsson
- Re: [Sip] SIP de-REGISTER: Expires header vs expi… Dale Worley
- Re: [Sip] SIP de-REGISTER: Expires header vs expi… Francois Audet