[sipcore] Why "rollback" and how "rollback" // New revision of the re-INVITE handling draft
gao.yang2@zte.com.cn Thu, 09 July 2009 08:55 UTC
Return-Path: <gao.yang2@zte.com.cn>
X-Original-To: sipcore@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 747A43A6A31 for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 01:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.341, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_71=0.6, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 JTNWxXkvXJUU for <sipcore@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 01:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx5.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F23BC3A6988 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 01:55:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.30.17.100] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 111641727820181; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 16:39:38 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.30.3.19] by [10.30.17.100] with StormMail ESMTP id 12012.6637927919; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 16:49:36 +0800 (CST)
Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse2.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id n698uQU7052279; Thu, 9 Jul 2009 16:56:26 +0800 (CST) (envelope-from gao.yang2@zte.com.cn)
To: SIPCORE <sipcore@ietf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.4 March 27, 2005
Message-ID: <OFEBB7C02C.A15E4B26-ON482575EE.002C39AF-482575EE.003115B4@zte.com.cn>
From: gao.yang2@zte.com.cn
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:56:05 +0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 6.5.4|March 27, 2005) at 2009-07-09 16:56:09, Serialize complete at 2009-07-09 16:56:09
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 003115AE482575EE_="
X-MAIL: mse2.zte.com.cn n698uQU7052279
Cc: OKUMURA Shinji <shin@softfront.co.jp>
Subject: [sipcore] Why "rollback" and how "rollback" // New revision of the re-INVITE handling draft
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 08:55:57 -0000
[as individual] Why "rollback"? Choose the session state is the first step. And the reason is: 1. Obey the original concept of RFC3261; 2. It is the intuitionistic(user point of view) requirement for rejecting session modification. How "rollback"? Choose the solution of how to reach the state is the second step: There are more than one solution for this. Widely discussed solutions are: 1. draft-gaoyang-sipping-session-state-criterion-03 2. draft-camarillo-sipcore-reinvite-00 "draft-gaoyang-sipping-session-state-criterion-03" classify session modifications into different categories and specify different rules for different categories. This proposal has same merits: 1. Has no violation to current RFCs; 2. Has no racing condition problem. But Gonzalo pointed out a problem(I remember Paul said something like this, but not shocked me at that time): Impossible to understand the current state by just looking the call flow; details about the messages would be needed. Though we can avoid it by BCP, it is really a problem in theory which changes the charts' style for our engineers. So, I support "draft-camarillo-sipcore-reinvite-00" now. And we really need the regulation to making equipment interworking about this problem exercisable. =================================== Zip : 210012 Tel : 87211 Tel2 :(+86)-025-52877211 e_mail : gao.yang2@zte.com.cn =================================== -------------------------------------------------------- ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.