Re: [Stox] review: stox-im-03

Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com> Tue, 24 September 2013 12:37 UTC

Return-Path: <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1AB321F9946 for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 05:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.378
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FUZZY_VLIUM=0.001, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_MLH_Stock1=0.87, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OV6FL3PdkMKQ for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 05:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC6EA11E812A for <stox@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 05:37:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7f738e000003ee3-84-5241876d9830
Received: from ESESSHC008.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id C2.3B.16099.D6781425; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 14:37:01 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB109.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.228]) by ESESSHC008.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.42]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 14:37:01 +0200
From: Salvatore Loreto <salvatore.loreto@ericsson.com>
To: "stpeter@stpeter.im" <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Thread-Topic: [Stox] review: stox-im-03
Thread-Index: Ac65IsO1p7JAEQL9aEmO5oEIBkR/Dw==
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:37:00 +0000
Message-ID: <2B9B48179856DC4FA00C93C79EB7E64A2A443A@ESESSMB109.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.146]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrMLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW5uu2OQQXe7ssX/HU2sFsf29DM7 MHksWfKTyWPunhfMAUxRXDYpqTmZZalF+nYJXBmdzy6zFmyRrDi64gpbA+M90S5GTg4JAROJ f58us0DYYhIX7q1n62Lk4hASOMwo8f7vZ3YIZwmjxLxtbxlBqtgEzCSeP9zCDGKLCOhK3Pxy AaiIg4NZQFni0BRZEFNYQE3ixL8kiAp1iZPLzrNB2HoSt69cAdvFIqAqMXXiVTCbV8BbYlfP SlYQmxHohu+n1jCB2MwC4hK3nsxngrhNQGLJnvPMELaoxMvH/1ghbCWJHxsusUDU60gs2P2J DcLWlli28DUzxHxBiZMzn7BMYBSZhWTsLCQts5C0zELSsoCRZRUje25iZk56ueEmRmDAH9zy W3cH46lzIocYpTlYlMR5N+mdCRQSSE8sSc1OTS1ILYovKs1JLT7EyMTBKdXAKG+bdP/1z2lV FW5tiukFgVvL/TJXFEx9LWNkczo65+Lt/eVecTG3c0/+bBfhdyt8uLS9e5u6wZfk0/s37Fr/ YOmGpSXNh7gPXMgPd2a9Yunsu8SgMZTz0PE3az0225i6n7pmz68fsZ7bjjmr8rbdby+9+KpV na6Z8i1GKWuSK+b+zQuJUliixFKckWioxVxUnAgACZ3PwkYCAAA=
Cc: "stox@ietf.org" <stox@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Stox] review: stox-im-03
X-BeenThere: stox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP-TO-XMPP Working Group discussion list <stox.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/stox>
List-Post: <mailto:stox@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:37:15 -0000

Thanks Peter


--Original message---
Sender: "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Time: Tue Sep 24 15:35:00 EEST 2013
Cc: stox@ietf.org, 
Subject: Re: [Stox] review: stox-im-03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 9/24/13 12:02 AM, Salvatore Loreto wrote:
> On 9/24/13 2:45 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: Hi Sal, thanks for the
> review.
> 
> On 9/20/13 4:42 AM, Salvatore Loreto wrote:
> 
>>>> my only comments is about the fact that section 3. XMPP to
>>>> SIP implies that the MESSAGE is always (and maybe can only
>>>> be) delivered over a TCP connection; RFC3428 states
>>>> 
>>>> Whenever possible, MESSAGE requests SHOULD be sent over
>>>> transports that implement end-to-end congestion control, such
>>>> as TCP or SCTP. However, SIP does not provide a mechanism to
>>>> prevent a downstream hop from sending a request over UDP.
>>>> 
>>>> so you can delivery it over UDP as well and that has also
>>>> being raised in a previous thread while talking on the
>>>> Call-ID mapping to <thread/>. Actually you will be forced to
>>>> deliver over UDP if the SIMPLE server only supports UDP.
> It's not clear to me why the XMPP-to-SIP gateway couldn't
> communicate with the SIMPLE server over UDP. Which text in Section
> 3 do you think implies that only TCP connections are supported?
>> there is not text at all, and that is the problem. When I read
>> the Section 3 and the example I got the impression that I can
>> only use TCP to forward the message on the SIP side but maybe it
>> is only me!

I doubt it is only you. :-)

Because there is no such thing as XMPP over UDP, the gateway from SIP
to XMPP will need to communicate over TCP. However, I see no reason
why the gateway from XMPP to SIP could not be "smart" and send SIP
messages over TCP or UDP depending on what the far SIP server
supports. I'll work to add some clarifying text on these points.

Peter

- -- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=VAX3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----