Hi Klaus,
Klaus Darilion wrote: > Maxim Sobolev schrieb: > >> Klaus Darilion wrote: >> >>>> The correct behavior of the tm module in this case would be to >>>> continue with INVITE re-transmits until we get provisional response >>>> and immediate CANCEL once that response comes in. >>>> >>> Is this really the correct behavior? Is this behavior defined in RFC >>> 3261? >>> >> --- RFC 3261 --- >> Once the CANCEL is constructed, the client SHOULD check whether it >> has received any response (provisional or final) for the request >> being cancelled (herein referred to as the "original request"). >> >> If no provisional response has been received, the CANCEL request MUST >> NOT be sent; rather, the client MUST wait for the arrival of a >> provisional response before sending the request. >> --- RFC 3261 --- >> > > Ok. But this does not explicitly mention that the proxy should still > send retransmissions. > > I agree on this, but so far there was no explicit mention that it should or it shouldn't :)... > >> According to my reading yes, UAC should wait either arrival of the first >> provisional response or expiration of Timer B (doing due retransmits in >> the meantime for unreliable transports) and send CANCEL if provisional >> reply comes in. >> > > Yes. From figure 5 it looks like retransmissions should not be stopped, > but figures are usually not normative. > As mentioned before, IMHO , figure 5 does not contain at all the case of a CANCEL generated by the UAC. So I guess it does not provide any useful info for our case. > anyway, I asked on the sip-implementors list for help ... and IMO PRACK > should be used for lossy networks. > indeed, I think there are on that list persons with better understanding on the SIP RFC ;) Regards, Bogdan _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
