Re: [sipcore] RFC4028 : sessiontimer-race
OKUMURA Shinji <ietf.shinji@gmail.com> Mon, 22 June 2020 09:29 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf.shinji@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E7C93A0BCF for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 02:29:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 3Fw1XPGlMLPY for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 02:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x102e.google.com (mail-pj1-x102e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A37583A0BA9 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 02:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x102e.google.com with SMTP id b7so6464662pju.0 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 02:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=apyZlrjzTcLN/xE1E8x3HQnNOyHfRKkxp8TTgusbMB0=; b=Dy8i++4HbhKDks0qblcYX7ctmQUw8oNmfsCyjBDLUnUL1V0kZ1ADTvK33gVedVqdi6 RbrSFKq0tdowIg7NNNyuJAk5YtsSe9/aYrF9jsG/CkPvX5pM1yGmybbhtuLikdYMsPx4 lWdMAkV8jF/27Qk1iDvz61QrxPpvKEpDC4SBp4FU0WiLy+AG3uBCRDc+MoZ2uL16z0TV 3lva1DOzVT2iz5+Avvno7VInwsSWQHjRgI1RgxexAyIG13WHJ8JtsIadJ8cNO94zJRTw 6SCC/dygIV6I29f1at3sGzDJchN9Scs4j7kb+ZMoYrwQn61TKuKtPG0aGpD+3fXy10wd 38+g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=apyZlrjzTcLN/xE1E8x3HQnNOyHfRKkxp8TTgusbMB0=; b=kfzdKMn3XzdZXc1GjHaEDJAwbUsfKeRwnN8mPNOGCY8Bfu67H+ZfQnE3HrvueUs3hA NmnpsEtNIMybc/oAjYXK1II0D43Uwj8PQBeNGLIdSkTJHmVoETnTKafwV5IMuYTshfk7 rEMg+IF4/zr+ue/S9frMyeTi7uSYjtFJ4mkQRY8/hk1x8bgQ8p/XOEcTN+RvXpBF3oOq rz30bc6ehrvlEzo6+PdjT9N2wfaidbjrVlqhUtPx0gp0QEJoUtGqXQTUKbF7oEmeN8Xa XnE6BVec1s3Pcl+8u7gyOe8RrsrNr9T3Qb5lLA4z2GOeXAc9Z7c7J5EyxVyw3XRsQnkg 9/Pg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532imU7DTV+3dpa9G+5TApF83PKcUO3SOjGkhGKSecu34xvW7vGg 0RhOYJNXyv4z9X1CvO0cSd4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx8r1lFafp9EUz0XPNvnKeW5FIcwywLLrA8zMxf0oolOU1dyBXM2uo104peR7GTt0AKtHfvgg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:6ace:: with SMTP id b14mr17556544pjm.13.1592818164107; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 02:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.126] (x156176.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp. [122.249.156.176]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id fy21sm12643153pjb.38.2020.06.22.02.29.22 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 22 Jun 2020 02:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
Cc: SIPCORE <sipcore@ietf.org>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
References: <7c016eca-e3a1-e2af-cf70-6757f782eaf8@gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvVSLRA_GYnf_zGzSCwrSdgMLOnJaUYJC09UJm7m96tOQ@mail.gmail.com> <598ca935-49af-3acc-a97c-066b812ed381@gmail.com> <CAD5OKxvNkQDSkNr_iQhHZhM2YQUr7skBS9_baR4TesqM_XuOAw@mail.gmail.com>
From: OKUMURA Shinji <ietf.shinji@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <749a482a-8d9b-93e6-33f2-264ed05fcb68@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 18:29:21 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxvNkQDSkNr_iQhHZhM2YQUr7skBS9_baR4TesqM_XuOAw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sipcore/16GCu652YGgxYBdvkyGEeuidhps>
Subject: Re: [sipcore] RFC4028 : sessiontimer-race
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 22 Jun 2020 09:29:26 -0000
Hi, The race condition resolution should be in the main scope, but where is the latest proposal for this part? Regards, Shinji On 2020/06/22 18:20, Roman Shpount wrote: > Shinji, > > This draft was severely out of date. Proposals in it have known problems. > _____________ > Roman Shpount > > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 5:15 AM OKUMURA Shinji <ietf.shinji@gmail.com <mailto:ietf.shinji@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Roman, > > I thought you were in favor of the draft proposal, but were you against it? > And if both session refresh requests are rejected with 491, will the proxy be negatively affected? > > Regards, > Shinji > > On 2020/06/22 15:44, Roman Shpount wrote: > > This is broken and not the solution for the session timer collision problem. > > > > Session-Expires is inserted by proxies. Proxies cannot reliably determine that another transaction is in progress. UA refusing session expires if another transaction is in progress will break existing implementations. > > _____________ > > Roman Shpount > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 5:48 AM OKUMURA Shinji <ietf.shinji@gmail.com <mailto:ietf.shinji@gmail.com> <mailto:ietf.shinji@gmail.com <mailto:ietf.shinji@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > > > Christer, > > > > Will you apply the following solutions to bis? > > > > draft-ietf-sipcore-sessiontimer-race-02 > > 1.2. Solution > > > > This document updates [RFC4028], by clarifying the procedures for > > negotiating usage of the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] > > session timer mechanism [RFC4028]. The following clarifications are > > provided: > > > > o A Session-Expires header field can only be included in a session > > refresh request if there is no ongoing negotiation of usage of the > > session timer mechanism, and if there is no ongoing INVITE > > transaction. > > o A user agent shall, if it receives a session refresh request with a > > Session-Expires header field during an ongoing negotiation of > > usage of the session timer mechanism, or when there is an ongoing > > INVITE transaction, send a 491 (Request Pending) response to the > > request. > > o The absence of a Session-Expires header field in a response will > > disable usage of the session timer mechanism only if the > > associated request contained a Session-Expires header field. > > > > Assuming all entities(UAC, UAS and proxies) keep a consistent policy for their own session-timer, even if transactions conflict, I think the results are also consistent. > > Does the request still need to be reject with 491 in spite of no glare? > > And an UPDATE request is used for updating a remote-target-uri as well as the session timer. > > Should UAs reject the UPDATE? > > > > Regards, > > Shinji > > > > _______________________________________________ > > sipcore mailing list > > sipcore@ietf.org <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org> <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore > > >
- [sipcore] RFC4028 : sessiontimer-race OKUMURA Shinji
- Re: [sipcore] RFC4028 : sessiontimer-race Roman Shpount
- Re: [sipcore] RFC4028 : sessiontimer-race OKUMURA Shinji
- Re: [sipcore] RFC4028 : sessiontimer-race Roman Shpount
- Re: [sipcore] RFC4028 : sessiontimer-race OKUMURA Shinji
- Re: [sipcore] RFC4028 : sessiontimer-race Christer Holmberg