Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 5407 error?

2011-04-12 Thread Peter Krebs
I too have noticed the somewhat strange mentioning of a "server timeout" and at first thought it is referring to Timer L from RFC 6026 and the prior drafts - however, this can not be since the INVITE transaction fix was formulated after RFC 3261. Did the IETF folks invent a time machine and only us

Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 5407 error?

2011-04-12 Thread Brett Tate
> While sending BYE for the initial INVITE is prohibited > by RFC 3261 before an ACK is received, I guess this > does not hold for RE-INVITEs since the dialog is > already established. Is this correct, as re-invites > are not mentioned at all in sec. 15? RFC 3261 does not generically require th

Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 5407 error?

2011-04-12 Thread Pekka Pessi
Hello, On Mon, 2011-04-11 at 12:50 +0200, ext Peter Krebs wrote: > While perusing the race condition examples in RFC 5407 I noticed what seems > to be an inconsistency in regard to RFC 3261. The example in sec. 3.2.4 > depicts the callee (Bob) sending a BYE request immediately after the 200, > how

Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 5407 error?

2011-04-12 Thread Peter Krebs
First of all, many thanks for both answers. As for your modified example, I think this situation (UAS receiving an ACK in mortal state, state change caused by BYE received from UAC) is discussed in sec. 3.1.6 of RFC 5407 (with the sole difference that the first ACK is lost, not reordered as in you

Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 5407 error?

2011-04-11 Thread Worley, Dale R (Dale)
> From: Peter Krebs [pkr...@gmail.com] > > While perusing the race condition examples in RFC 5407 I noticed what seems > to be an inconsistency in regard to RFC 3261. The example in sec. 3.2.4 > depicts the callee (Bob) sending a BYE request immediately after the 200, > however RFC 3261, sec. 15 c

Re: [Sip-implementors] RFC 5407 error?

2011-04-11 Thread Brett Tate
> Do I misunderstand the given example or is this an actual > inconsistency? Or is this intentional and just following > the observed behavior of implementations out in the > field and thus recommended? RFC 5407 provides a "Best Current Practice" for potential SIP race conditions. If there are

[Sip-implementors] RFC 5407 error?

2011-04-11 Thread Peter Krebs
Hello, While perusing the race condition examples in RFC 5407 I noticed what seems to be an inconsistency in regard to RFC 3261. The example in sec. 3.2.4 depicts the callee (Bob) sending a BYE request immediately after the 200, however RFC 3261, sec. 15 clearly states that "...the calleeā€™s UA MU