On 4/18/2013 10:40 AM, Simon Wilkinson wrote: > Then, there is an additional question - is the hit you take from cache > invalidation worth terminating a call for? That's going to be a trade off, > but I suspect that the current behaviour just doesn't allow a server enough > time to tidy up.
This I believe is the critical question. Is the additional cost of invalidating the cache after receipt of the first RX_CALL_BUSY which will force a new RXAFS_FetchStatus rpc to be issued before the call that is canceled due to BUSY can be retried less expensive than the old behavior of waiting for the call channel to become available or for a timeout to be hit. My gut reaction is that the additional expense both in terms of round trip time and server load is not worth the optimization of immediately retrying a call that received BUSY on another channel. Jeffrey Altman
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
