Hi Maxim, I was also digging through Figure 5 , but it seams strange to me that the UAC cancel scenario is not included in that diagram.
Regards, Bogdan Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Dan Pascu wrote: >> My issue with what you're proposing is that it tries to modify the >> SIP callflow to something no specified in the RFC, to solve a non-SIP >> problem. I also do not like the idea that the proxy would keep >> retransmitting on a branch after the originator has canceled the call. > > Well, the problem is that while it's not specified directly in the > RFC, but the current UAC behavior clearly violates 3-way handshake > mechanism and leaves window open for UAC is UAS ending up in disjoint > states due to 100 Trying loss. We can argue how big that window is > (for example on some of my servers I can see about 0.1% of UDP being > dropped), but the fact remains. > > If you look at the Figure 5 in the RFC 3261 the only way client > transaction could move directly from the Calling state to the > Terminated state is via Timer B or Transport Err. No other path exist. > > Regards, _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
