it's an implementation choice, the standard tries to be minimalistic, and not ellaborate on that. If we didn't want to depend on a proxy server (which may be a reasonable thing to do), just have your new timer that expires under lack of final response. The only thing to be worried about really from the interop viewopint is you can be hanging for quite long time on early media (or late-charging if you wish to call it so) --> you may have an option to extend the timer on receipt of 18x. Generally allowing the timer to be changed in scripting on a call-by-call basis could be reasonable too (as we do in ser)
-jiri Juha Heinanen wrote: > Raphael Coeffic writes: > > > Any thoughts/proposals on that? > > like stefan suggested: > > There are two timers in OpenSER : > * fr_timer - this timer is used when no response was received > yet. If there is no response after fr_timer seconds the > timer triggers (and failure route will be executed if > t_on_failure() was called). If a provisional response was > received, the timer is set to fr_inv_timer for INVITE > transactions, and RT_T2 for all other transactions. If a > final reponse is received, the transaction has finished. > * fr_inv_timer - this timer is used when a provisional > reponse was received for an INVITE transaction. isn't it kinda called open_fr_inv_timer in openser? :-) > > this is not a problem, however, if outbound proxy is in use, because it > immediately responds with 100 trying and then either with negative or > positive final reply (assuming the proxy stays alive). > > -- juha > _______________________________________________ > Semsdev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/semsdev > _______________________________________________ Semsdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/semsdev
