IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sipcore] RFC 3261: 305 Use Proxy

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Mon, 09 December 2013 20:06 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97B251AE2E1 for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 12:06:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.036
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kp6BezTzVp5o for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 12:06:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C9121AE07F for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 12:06:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orochi-2.roach.at (99-152-145-110.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.145.110]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id rB9K6GR8026065 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:06:16 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <52A622B3.3050801@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 14:06:11 -0600
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@alum.mit.edu>, Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com>, "sipcore@ietf.org" <sipcore@ietf.org>
References: <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD2338E75169@XMB104ADS.rim.net> <52A61DC8.7000000@alum.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <52A61DC8.7000000@alum.mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 99.152.145.110 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Subject: Re: [sipcore] RFC 3261: 305 Use Proxy
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/>
List-Post: <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 20:06:28 -0000

On 12/9/13 13:45, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> On 12/7/13 11:56 PM, Andrew Allen wrote:
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> 3GPP specifications make use of the 305 Use Proxy response but don't 
>> go into details of how the Contact header is utilised.
>
> My point about taking a survey is that we would want to take account 
> of what is actually done in the wild. From what you say, 3GPP isn't 
> any clearer that 3261 is, so we can't use it as data about what is 
> done in the wild. Rather, we need to know what actual 3GPP deployments 
> do with it.

I'll point out that the SIPit events would be an excellent place to 
gather this kind of information. If we can wait until late next year, we 
could get really good, hard stats on what a bunch of UAs do.

/a

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email