Re: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending REGISTER request
> I haven't dug through the specifications. But if they have the > same Call-ID, then the CSeq tells the order the REGISTERs are > to have effect. If the network reorders them, the de-REGISTER > will prevail because it has a higher CSeq. My current understanding is that it depends upon implementation and timing. More specifically by the time the late REGISTER arrives, the registrar might have already removed the binding and Call-ID/CSeq stuff as part of the de-REGISTER. Thus, it might not still be able to detect the ordering issue. ___ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
Re: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending REGISTER request
Paul Kyzivat writes: > Another consideration is whether these are done using the same Call-ID. > (In the same pseudo-dialog.) I don't think it will generally make any > difference, but it may present issues if you are also requesting a > temporary gruu with the registration. I haven't dug through the specifications. But if they have the same Call-ID, then the CSeq tells the order the REGISTERs are to have effect. If the network reorders them, the de-REGISTER will prevail because it has a higher CSeq. A UA SHOULD use the same Call-ID for all registrations during a single boot cycle. Dale ___ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
Re: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending REGISTER request
On 6/28/17 1:11 AM, Parveen Aggarwal wrote: Dear Expert, Is it valid to send deRegister request i.e. REGISTER with expires=0 before receiving final response for previous registration request i.e. REGISTER with expires >0 ? As per RFC 3261, It is mentioned for new REGISTER request only UAs MUST NOT send a new registration (that is, containing new Contact header field values, as opposed to a retransmission) until they have received a final response from the registrar for the previous one or the previous REGISTER request has timed out. I see no particular reason why this should be considered an error. However it might not be wise. It would be possible for the two requests to get reordered, so that the unregister is processed before the register. Both would appear to succeed, but the end state of the registrar would be different. Another consideration is whether these are done using the same Call-ID. (In the same pseudo-dialog.) I don't think it will generally make any difference, but it may present issues if you are also requesting a temporary gruu with the registration. Thanks, Paul ___ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
Re: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending REGISTER request
Hi Praveen, I didn’t remember exact specification, But it will be always better to send DE-REGISTER once the REGISTER message response is received. Regards Srinivas From: Parveen Aggarwal [mailto:parveenakara...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 11:15 AM To: Banda, Srinivas (Srinivas) Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending REGISTER request Thanks Srinivas for reply. Is there any specification which restricts to send REGISTER with expires=0 before receiving final response of REGISTER with expires>0? Also, what if first REGISTER(With Expires>0) reaches to the network and after that DUT sending REGISTER with expires=0? Regards, Parveen On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Banda, Srinivas (Srinivas) mailto:sriba...@avaya.com>> wrote: What if the Previous REGISTER(expires > 0) lost in the network, and the REGISTER with expires = 0 might reach the REGISTRAR first in this case REGISTRAR will not find the active registration, so end up with 4xx response. Regards Srinivas -Original Message- From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu<mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu> [mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu<mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu>] On Behalf Of Parveen Aggarwal Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 10:41 AM To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu<mailto:sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu> Subject: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending REGISTER request Dear Expert, Is it valid to send deRegister request i.e. REGISTER with expires=0 before receiving final response for previous registration request i.e. REGISTER with expires >0 ? As per RFC 3261, It is mentioned for new REGISTER request only UAs MUST NOT send a new registration (that is, containing new Contact header field values, as opposed to a retransmission) until they have received a final response from the registrar for the previous one or the previous REGISTER request has timed out. Thanks, Parveen ___ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu<mailto:Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.cs.columbia.edu_mailman_listinfo_sip-2Dimplementors&d=DwICAg&c=BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=DfcjuTVsKgmJaaUkoM6ILHncIUfFzD1YvkhqXoTJ3oE&m=GfL4qOD1hrOoOz-iubTqqxkfDYYxZfSjZbnYyPbrRKA&s=Yley5vwhmX2fXslDVs3mS3hSp9ddYoA20hhRBMh-WB8&e= ___ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
Re: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending REGISTER request
Thanks Srinivas for reply. Is there any specification which restricts to send REGISTER with expires=0 before receiving final response of REGISTER with expires>0? Also, what if first REGISTER(With Expires>0) reaches to the network and after that DUT sending REGISTER with expires=0? Regards, Parveen On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Banda, Srinivas (Srinivas) < sriba...@avaya.com> wrote: > What if the Previous REGISTER(expires > 0) lost in the network, and the > REGISTER with expires = 0 might reach the REGISTRAR first in this case > REGISTRAR will not find the active registration, so end up with 4xx > response. > > Regards > Srinivas > > -Original Message- > From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto: > sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Parveen > Aggarwal > Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 10:41 AM > To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu > Subject: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending > REGISTER request > > Dear Expert, > > Is it valid to send deRegister request i.e. REGISTER with expires=0 before > receiving final response for previous registration request i.e. REGISTER > with expires >0 ? > > As per RFC 3261, > It is mentioned for new REGISTER request only > > UAs MUST NOT send a new registration (that is, containing new Contact >header field values, as opposed to a retransmission) until they have >received a final response from the registrar for the previous one or >the previous REGISTER request has timed out. > > > Thanks, > > Parveen > ___ > Sip-implementors mailing list > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists. > cs.columbia.edu_mailman_listinfo_sip-2Dimplementors&d=DwICAg&c= > BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=DfcjuTVsKgmJaaUkoM6ILHncIUfFzD1YvkhqXoTJ3oE&m= > GfL4qOD1hrOoOz-iubTqqxkfDYYxZfSjZbnYyPbrRKA&s= > Yley5vwhmX2fXslDVs3mS3hSp9ddYoA20hhRBMh-WB8&e= > ___ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
Re: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending REGISTER request
What if the Previous REGISTER(expires > 0) lost in the network, and the REGISTER with expires = 0 might reach the REGISTRAR first in this case REGISTRAR will not find the active registration, so end up with 4xx response. Regards Srinivas -Original Message- From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Parveen Aggarwal Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 10:41 AM To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu Subject: [Sip-implementors] Sending deRegister request just after sending REGISTER request Dear Expert, Is it valid to send deRegister request i.e. REGISTER with expires=0 before receiving final response for previous registration request i.e. REGISTER with expires >0 ? As per RFC 3261, It is mentioned for new REGISTER request only UAs MUST NOT send a new registration (that is, containing new Contact header field values, as opposed to a retransmission) until they have received a final response from the registrar for the previous one or the previous REGISTER request has timed out. Thanks, Parveen ___ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.cs.columbia.edu_mailman_listinfo_sip-2Dimplementors&d=DwICAg&c=BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=DfcjuTVsKgmJaaUkoM6ILHncIUfFzD1YvkhqXoTJ3oE&m=GfL4qOD1hrOoOz-iubTqqxkfDYYxZfSjZbnYyPbrRKA&s=Yley5vwhmX2fXslDVs3mS3hSp9ddYoA20hhRBMh-WB8&e= ___ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors
