Re: [Sip-implementors] Reinvite/ACK race

2017-11-01 Thread Dale R. Worley
Alex Balashov writes: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:38:00PM -0400, Dale R. Worley wrote: >> As others have said, the problem must be solved by the UAs, not the >> proxy. Indeed, what with possible network delays and re-sending of >> lost packets, there's no way to guarantee end-to-end sequencing o

Re: [Sip-implementors] Reinvite/ACK race

2017-10-31 Thread Alex Balashov
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:38:00PM -0400, Dale R. Worley wrote: > As others have said, the problem must be solved by the UAs, not the > proxy. Indeed, what with possible network delays and re-sending of > lost packets, there's no way to guarantee end-to-end sequencing of > messages. Even with TC

Re: [Sip-implementors] Reinvite/ACK race

2017-10-31 Thread Dale R. Worley
Alex Balashov writes: > 5. UA B sends end-to-end ACK for reinvite #1 and almost >simultaneously sends reinvite #2. The temporal delta is >between reinvite #2 and ACK for reinvite #1 on the wire >is 3 ms. > > The issue is that the concurrency characteristics of proxy P are such > that i

Re: [Sip-implementors] Reinvite/ACK race

2017-10-31 Thread Alex Balashov
Paul, I'm not a SIP standards expert by any stretch, but yours is the interpretation I tend to favour and which sits best with me. Since in-dialog requests are originated by the dialog parties, timing issues belong with them, not with intermediate proxies IMHO. On October 31, 2017 10:50:45 AM

Re: [Sip-implementors] Reinvite/ACK race

2017-10-31 Thread Paul Kyzivat
On 10/31/17 8:44 AM, Liviu Chircu wrote: Hi Alex, IMO, building logic into the proxy which encourages/mends the proper sequencing of UDP messages does nothing more than to hide the underlying problem, i.e. "UDP does not guarantee message sequencing in the first place" *. There is also a subtl

Re: [Sip-implementors] Reinvite/ACK race

2017-10-31 Thread Liviu Chircu
Hi Alex, IMO, building logic into the proxy which encourages/mends the proper sequencing of UDP messages does nothing more than to hide the underlying problem, i.e. "UDP does not guarantee message sequencing in the first place" *. There is also a subtle point to be made here: your proxy's loo

Re: [Sip-implementors] Reinvite/ACK race

2017-10-30 Thread Alex Balashov
Piece of errata here (always when I'm typing): On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 01:11:50PM -0400, Alex Balashov wrote: > Hi, > > I've got a scenario like so: > >UA A -> Proxy P > UA B > > 1. UA A initiates call through Proxy P; > > 2. Dialog is established and confirmed, with Record-Route;

[Sip-implementors] Reinvite/ACK race

2017-10-30 Thread Alex Balashov
Hi, I've got a scenario like so: UA A -> Proxy P > UA B 1. UA A initiates call through Proxy P; 2. Dialog is established and confirmed, with Record-Route; 3. UA B sends reinvite #1 through P to A; 4. UA B sends 2xx reply; 5. UA B sends end-to-end ACK for reinvite #1 and almost