Paul Kyzivat writes:
>> The larger system-design questions are worth considering. If the DNS
>> for edge.test.com is adjusted to give higher priority to proxy2, doesn't
>> that mean that the administrator *really wants* all new requests to go
>> to proxy2 if possible? That would argue against re
On 3/15/16 8:03 AM, ankur bansal wrote:
Hi Paul
Please explain more about what you are asserting for TLS. It looks wrong
to me, but I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say.
I was trying to point to RFC 5923 which provides provision to reuse same
TLS connection not only for sendin
> On 15 Mar 2016, at 13:38, Brett Tate wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>>> As far as I know, the main complaint is that it can
>>> temporarily prevent/delay honoring the DNS configured load
>>> balancing and priorities.
>>
>> So there is a consensus that transaction based DNS load
>> balancing is more prefer
Hi,
> > As far as I know, the main complaint is that it can
> > temporarily prevent/delay honoring the DNS configured load
> > balancing and priorities.
>
> So there is a consensus that transaction based DNS load
> balancing is more preferable to the dialog based TCP
> connection reuse? Meaning t
Hi Paul
>>>Please explain more about what you are asserting for TLS. It looks wrong
to me, but I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say.
I was trying to point to RFC 5923 which provides provision to reuse same
TLS connection not only for sending Requests from Caller(A) but also for
re
Hi,
>As far as I know, the main complaint is that it can temporarily prevent/delay
>honoring
>the DNS configured load balancing and priorities.
So there is a consensus that transaction based DNS load balancing is more
preferable to the dialog based TCP connection reuse?
Meaning that is preferr
On 3/14/16 3:32 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
"xaled" writes:
A client originates a session over TCP connection to proxy1 after having it
resolved as top priority outbound proxy from preconfigured edge.test.com
domain. Proxy 1 sends 200 Ok response with following Record-Route header:
Record-Route:
"xaled" writes:
> A client originates a session over TCP connection to proxy1 after having it
> resolved as top priority outbound proxy from preconfigured edge.test.com
> domain. Proxy 1 sends 200 Ok response with following Record-Route header:
>
> Record-Route:
>
> Now client wants to send a re
On 3/14/16 8:07 AM, ankur bansal wrote:
Hi
There is no recommendation for using exisiting TCP connection for in-dialog
Sip requests.
As MTU for PRACK/BYE can be smaller ,so can be send over UDP also .
But for TLS recommendation is there to reuse same connection ,even for
request coming from call
Hi,
> Does this mean that there is even no recommendation to
> reuse existing TCP connection for sending BYE request?
For clarity, there are recommendations concerning the reuse of existing
connections. For instance, see RFC 5626 section 4.3; similarly, RFC 5923
discusses the RFC 3261 persistent
Hi Ankur,
Thank you for the response. I was under impression that same reuse
recommendation applies for both TCP and TLS. But apparently it is not the case.
Does this mean that there is even no recommendation to reuse existing TCP
connection for sending BYE request?
Thanks,
Xaled
Hi
There is no recommendation for using exisiting TCP connection for in-dialog
Sip requests.
As MTU for PRACK/BYE can be smaller ,so can be send over UDP also .
But for TLS recommendation is there to reuse same connection ,even for
request coming from callee using alias in via .
Regards
Ankur Ban
Hi,
Consider following scenario - Proxy1 and Proxy2 are edge proxies that are
DNS resolvable from edge.test.com. DNS resolution does some load balancing
and dynamically changes priority of proxy1 and proxy2.
A client originates a session over TCP connection to proxy1 after having it
resolv
13 matches
Mail list logo
