Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-clarifications-03.txt
Ivo Sedlacek <ivo.sedlacek@ericsson.com> Thu, 31 July 2014 07:29 UTC
Return-Path: <ivo.sedlacek@ericsson.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 E35081A036F for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 00:29:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 CHHDMZdCvahA for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 00:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1CB51A0292 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 00:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-f79da6d000004ad3-7d-53d9f03db887
Received: from ESESSHC010.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id DD.AC.19155.D30F9D35; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 09:29:01 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB301.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.135]) by ESESSHC010.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.48]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 09:29:00 +0200
From: Ivo Sedlacek <ivo.sedlacek@ericsson.com>
To: Ivo Sedlacek <ivo.sedlacek@ericsson.com>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>, Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com>, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, "sipcore@ietf.org" <sipcore@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-clarifications-03.txt
Thread-Index: AQHPqrHlmnmUsyWPWkiMyO8iEueSdZu3Zw8AgAAHa4CAAU4pgP//+hIAgAEMFKCAAAnd8A==
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 07:29:00 +0000
Message-ID: <39B5E4D390E9BD4890E2B310790061011270BA18@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
References: <20140728221604.19558.73431.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <53D6CC3D.4000005@nostrum.com> <39B5E4D390E9BD4890E2B310790061011270A76B@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se> <53D7BB5D.5010402@nostrum.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233991419A@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <53D92314.6040607@nostrum.com> <39B5E4D390E9BD4890E2B310790061011270B9E1@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <39B5E4D390E9BD4890E2B310790061011270B9E1@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US, cs-CZ
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.20]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_39B5E4D390E9BD4890E2B310790061011270BA18ESESSMB301erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupmkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZGfG3Rtf2w81gg5ZjBhb3521ltNjzdxG7 xbU5jWwWX39sYnNg8ZjVsJbdY8mSn0wes3Y+YQlgjuKySUnNySxLLdK3S+DKOPyrn73gwgmm igndf5gbGFsOMHUxcnJICJhInFt2mQXCFpO4cG89WxcjF4eQwFFGiVW/NkI5Sxgllq24yAxS xSagJzFxyxFWkISIwCFGiclHN7KDJIQFsiVWbtjFCGKLCORI9H9uYYOwwyT+7d0M1MzBwSKg KvFtRxJImFfAV+LQtD5miAWvmSQmbnsPdgangJ/E3/2tYDMZBWQlrv7pBZvJLCAucevJfKiz BSSW7DnPDGGLSrx8/I8VwlaUuDp9ORNEfb7Em6aFLBDLBCVOznzCMoFRZBaSUbOQlM1CUjYL 6FRmAU2J9bv0IUoUJaZ0P2SHsDUkWufMZUcWX8DIvopRtDi1OCk33chYL7UoM7m4OD9PLy+1 ZBMjMPYObvmtuoPx8hvHQ4wCHIxKPLwPsm4GC7EmlhVX5h5ilOZgURLnXXhuXrCQQHpiSWp2 ampBalF8UWlOavEhRiYOTqkGxsRnj2OCfU7G1C1bsjm/dJtA78Evn1lqD2Yd/fsxrHDD70+y 4fGLQxuMi9amMzzROjxPY6KT3J5lX2ZwP2EN49jObPJYjPv/4XVLPKrvrTugO2Hx4qySzdaT l0Y2R/Ds+8wdHTrdz1+8xUzB5du117/U4pR5rH7tOqloYqgj+Ommy7cyPTZNASWW4oxEQy3m ouJEAN3KRA2eAgAA
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sipcore/bzspddVRZkRasuiBsxZkYX9nxdc
Subject: Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-clarifications-03.txt
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: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 07:29:08 -0000
(resending without the footer note, sorry about that). Kind regards Ivo Sedlacek If a REFER request is accepted (that is, a 2xx class response is returned), the recipient MUST create a subscription and send notifications of the status of the refer as described in Section 2.4.4.From: sipcore [mailto:sipcore-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ivo Sedlacek Sent: 31. července 2014 9:26 To: Robert Sparks; Andrew Allen; Adam Roach; sipcore@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-clarifications-03.txt Hello, According to the draft, the purpose of GRUU in Contact of INVITE request to " ensures that out-of-dialog REFER requests corresponding to any resulting INVITE dialogs arrive at this UA." If a UA rejects any out-of-dialog REFER requests corresponding to any dialogs related to an INVITE request, then setting up GRUU in Contact of INVITE does not provide any purpose. This is true __regardless__ whether the UA supports and use the draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-explicitsub. See attached mail giving an example of UA having two types of sessions, Type_A transferrable by REFER, and Type_B not transferrable by REFER. Given that different standardization organization has defined so many enablers which can run on a single UA, I find it weird that one can guarantee that the above cannot occur. Thus, I hesitate to mandate an unnecessary requirement influencing possible existing UA implementations and I prefer to be explicit on the exception for usage of GRUU in Contact of INVITE request: A UA that will accept a REFER request needs to include a GRUU in the Contact header field of all INVITE requests. This ensures that out-of-dialog REFER requests corresponding to any resulting INVITE dialogs arrive at this UA. >>>UAs that will not accept any out-of-dialog REFER requests corresponding to dialog(s) created by an INVITE request are exempted from including a GRUU in the Contact header field of the INVITE request.<<< Kind regards Ivo Sedlacek From: Robert Sparks [mailto:rjsparks@nostrum.com] Sent: 30. července 2014 18:54 To: Andrew Allen; Adam Roach; Ivo Sedlacek; sipcore@ietf.org<mailto:sipcore@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-clarifications-03.txt On 7/30/14, 10:33 AM, Andrew Allen wrote: I have a general concern with the direction this is now going. I don't think you have the backwards-compatibility concern quite right, but I agree that the current wording isn't there yet. Are we now saying here that it’s OK for a UA that supports receiving REFER to arbitrarily reject any REFER that would create a subscription (i.e be incompatible with RFC 3515 UACs by basically not supporting RFC 3515 UAS compliant behavior)? No, _this_ document is not defining new behavior. It's only clarifying what's already defined. According to RFC 3515 2.4.4 Using SIP Events to Report the Results of the Reference The NOTIFY mechanism defined in [2] MUST be used to inform the agent sending the REFER of the status of the reference. Therefore the ability to create an implicit subscription when accepting FWIW, Accepting is the key word here. a REFER is mandatory behavior in RFC 3515 and is expected to be supported by all RFC 3515 UACs I think before agreeing any wording here we should have a general discussion on the principle of whether these extensions that allow UACs to request that no implicit subscription can be effectively required by REFER UAS to be supported at the UAC. This, and what you have below, is a discussion we definitely need to have as part of the extension document. It is not necessary to wait for that discussion to complete the clarifications document that talks about what the specs say _now_. My discomfort with the current text is that we've made it complex to make it so that we don't have to update the document once the proposed extensions exist. There are NO currently standardized cases where the exemption in the current text would be invoked, and I don't think people are trying to argue there are - I'm hearing that to get there, they expect to invoke the yet-to-be-defined extension. So, lets go back to the slightly longer sentence that led to this: A UA that will accept a subscription-creating REFER request needs to include a GRUU as the Contact in all INVITE requests to ensure out-of-dialog REFER requests related to any dialog created by the INVITE arrive at this UA. In an attempt to be future-proof, that's introducing the potential for confusion about what the current standards define. Let's remove that confusion. Here's a proposed replacement, taking Adam's sentence simplification into account: A UA that will accept a REFER request needs to include a GRUU in the Contact header field of all INVITE requests. This ensures that out-of-dialog REFER requests corresponding to any resulting INVITE dialogs arrive at this UA. Future extensions [draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-explicitsub] might relax this requirement by defining a REFER request that cannot create an implicit subscription. Unless I hear objection soon, I'll rev the draft with that content. If so then I think we will need a new sip options tag (e.g REFER-NOSUB) to be used in place of the REFER options tag so that a RFC 3515 compliant UA that expects a NOTIFY to be sent upon receipt of a REFER and that includes an Accept-Contact request to reach a UA that supports REFER doesn’t end up at a UAS that doesn’t support compliant RFC 3515 behavior and ends up having its REFER requests rejected. My own view is that we should keep with the principle of backward compatibility and that even when these no automatic subscription extensions are supported that full support for RFC 3515 behavior is continued. Andrew From: sipcore [mailto:sipcore-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam Roach Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 11:19 AM To: Ivo Sedlacek; Robert Sparks; sipcore@ietf.org<mailto:sipcore@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-sparks-sipcore-refer-clarifications-03.txt On 7/29/14 09:52, Ivo Sedlacek wrote: Thus, the text should state: In general, UAs that support receiving >>and accepting an out-of-dialog<< REFER request >>corresponding to a dialog established by an INVITE request<< need to include a GRUU in the Contact header field of >>the<< INVITE request. This ensures that out-of-dialog REFER requests corresponding to any resulting INVITE dialogs are routed to the correct user agent. UAs that will never create a implicit subscription in response to a REFER (that is, those that will reject any REFER that might result in an implicit subscription) are exempted from this behavior. I helped with the phrasing here, and one of the goals here was to make the first sentence cover the vast majority of the cases (hence "in general"), with the exceptional cases described later. The problem was that the overall concept was getting lost in a maze of twisty clauses: the clarification had become worse than the source text; it was actually more confusing. Your proposal returns it to this very confusing state, and is way, way out into the realm of exceptional cases. So I'll counterpropose: In general, UAs that support receiving REFER requests need to include a GRUU in the Contact header field of all INVITE requests. This ensures that out-of-dialog REFER requests corresponding to any resulting INVITE dialogs are routed to the correct user agent. UAs that will not create a implicit subscription in response to a REFER for the resulting dialog(s) -- that is, those that will reject a corresponding REFER that might result in an implicit subscription -- are exempted from this behavior. /a
- [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft… Robert Sparks
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Adam Roach
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Andrew Allen
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Robert Sparks
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Adam Roach
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… OKUMURA Shinji
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Robert Sparks
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Andrew Allen
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Andrew Allen
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… OKUMURA Shinji
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Robert Sparks
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Andrew Allen
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Andrew Allen
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Robert Sparks
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Robert Sparks
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Adam Roach
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Robert Sparks
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Christer Holmberg
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Adam Roach
- Re: [sipcore] Fwd: New Version Notification for d… Ivo Sedlacek