dispa...@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS "ping"
Marius,
There is another important consideration to give to this. The OPTIONS
"ping" we described was intended to be between a device and its next hop.
What you would actually want is an OPTIONS that goes end
-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; 'Gonzalo
> Salgueiro'; 'Hadriel Kaplan'; dispa...@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS "ping"
>
> Paul E. Jones wrote:
> > Marius,
> >
> > It is certainly true that we were focused ent
i [mailto:marius.zbih...@1and1.ro]
>> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 6:00 AM
>> To: Paul E. Jones
>> Cc: sip-...@ietf.org; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Gonzalo
>> Salgueiro; Hadriel Kaplan
>> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS "ping"
>>
.ro]
> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 6:00 AM
> To: Paul E. Jones
> Cc: sip-...@ietf.org; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Gonzalo
> Salgueiro; Hadriel Kaplan
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS "ping"
>
> Paul E. Jones wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
>
Paul E. Jones wrote:
> Folks,
>
>
>
> Gonzalo and I produced an Internet Draft aiming at trying to bring some
> consistency to the way in which SIP user agents implement an OPTIONS "ping"
> procedure. It seems that a very large number of vendors do this, but
> unfortunately, there seems to be li
rom: $...@r\/|>r!`/@ [mailto:sarvpriyagu...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 3:51 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: sip-...@ietf.org; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Gonzalo
Salgueiro; Hadriel Kaplan
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS "ping"
Hi,
Gud to see y
Hi,
Gud to see your initiative.
Instead of using 486 for denoting overload, 503 message can be used. I have
seen this usage to use as overload control mechanism. Entirely in my
opinion, 486 is not apt.
cheers
sarvpriya
http://sarvpriyak.blogspot.com/
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Paul
Folks,
Gonzalo and I produced an Internet Draft aiming at trying to bring some
consistency to the way in which SIP user agents implement an OPTIONS "ping"
procedure. It seems that a very large number of vendors do this, but
unfortunately, there seems to be little consistency.
Initially, we
Session Timers detect availability of session and is restricted to an existing
dialog.
On the other hand, OPTIONS can be used outside of a dialog(session/call)
independently, to determine the larger availability of SIP UA at the far end,
even if on a per hop basis.
Both Session Timers and OPTI
pkyzi...@cisco.com]
> Sent: Sun 8/9/2009 2:48 AM
> To: Manoj Priyankara [TG]
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS
>
>
>
> Manoj Priyankara [TG] wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > According to the RFC 3261, SI
gt;
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@cisco.com]
> Sent: Sun 8/9/2009 2:48 AM
> To: Manoj Priyankara [TG]
> Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS
>
>
>
> Manoj Priyankara [TG] wr
to see the availability of the UAS.
BR,
Manoj
-Original Message-
From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzi...@cisco.com]
Sent: Sun 8/9/2009 2:48 AM
To: Manoj Priyankara [TG]
Cc: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS
Manoj Priyankara [TG] wrote:
Manoj Priyankara [TG] wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> According to the RFC 3261, SIP OPRIONS message should be used to query
> the statue of other UAC or the UAS. Is it OK to use the OPTIONS as a
> keep alive message to know whether the UAS is alive?
>
> Is it necessary to send the OPTIONS message from
ntors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of T
Satyanarayana-A12694
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 1:41 PM
To: shyam; Manoj Priyankara [TG]; Abhishek Dhammawat;
sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS
I don't think anyone prevents you from using OPTIONS as heart
-
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of
shyam
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 11:34 AM
To: 'Manoj Priyankara [TG]'; 'Abhishek Dhammawat';
sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implement
: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Manoj
Priyankara [TG]
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 6:59 PM
To: Abhishek Dhammawat; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS
Thanks Sir
...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of
Manoj Priyankara [TG]
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 6:40 PM
To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: [Sip-implementors] SIP OPTIONS
Dear All,
According to the RFC 3261, SIP OPRIONS message
Aricent
-Original Message-
From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu
[mailto:sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Manoj
Priyankara [TG]
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 6:40 PM
To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: [Sip-implementors] SIP
Dear All,
According to the RFC 3261, SIP OPRIONS message should be used to query
the statue of other UAC or the UAS. Is it OK to use the OPTIONS as a
keep alive message to know whether the UAS is alive?
Is it necessary to send the OPTIONS message from a registered user or is
it possible to send t
19 matches
Mail list logo
