Hi Ajit
You need to consider the expires in NOTIFY only so that you
reSUBSCRIBE in time and you need not remove and create a new dialog.
This has now become implementation specific, so I think you can take a
call on this.

Regards
Retesh

On 11/29/06, Ajit Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi All,
> I wanted to suggest a straightforward solution which will work in all
> scenarios.
> The question here is that, why we as Subscriber are updating our
> Subscribe duration for every Notify we get from Notifier. We can safely
> rely on the subscribe duration agreed upon by Subscribe-200ok exchange.
> Based on the Expires got from 200ok response the Subscriber can go for
> refresh. Otherwise, we can send a fresh subscribe if we see subscription
> state "terminated" in any Notify.
>
> Regards
> Ajit
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ajit
> Kumar
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 9:46 AM
> To: 'Paul Kyzivat'; 'Retesh'
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Calculation of Subscribe Duration
>
> Hi Paul,
> I was also thinking the same as you said but that has been mentioned on
> the Notifier side. Notifier can't lengthen the Subscribe duration with
> respect to what was proposed in 200ok response. In the scenario I
> described, Notifier is compliant to RFC but it's only the delayed notify
> that is causing a mismatch at Subscriber side. It's no where mentioned
> that the subscriber on getting a Notify from Notifier can't update or
> lengthen its Subscribe duration agreed upon after a Subscribe-200ok
> exchange.
> So I think what Ritesh has suggested may work but I don't know if it
> will be RFC compliant or not.
> Correct me if I am wrong.
>
>
> Regards
> Ajit
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 7:37 PM
> To: Retesh
> Cc: Ajit Kumar; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Calculation of Subscribe Duration
>
>
>
> Retesh wrote:
> > Hi Ajit
> > RFC doesnt mandate that NOTIFY should contain a expires value less
> > than that was in 200ok of SUBSCRIBE.
>
> Section 3.2.2 of 3265 says:
>
>     If the value of the "Subscription-State" header is "active" or
>     "pending", the notifier SHOULD also include in the "Subscription-
>     State" header an "expires" parameter which indicates the time
>     remaining on the subscription.  The notifier MAY use this mechanism
>     to shorten a subscription; however, this mechanism MUST NOT be used
>     to lengthen a subscription.
>
> It doesn't mandate that the notify contain the expiration time at all
> (that is SHOULD), but it MUST NOT lengthen the subscription.
>
>         Paul
>
> > So, say you remove this
> > consideration from your implementation and you just consider the
> > NOTIFY containing the expires value as the latest duration of
> > subscription, then there shouldnt be any problem.
> >
> > So, in your scenario you can calculate subscription duration as
> follows-
> >
> > reSUBSCRIBE (300) -->
> > 200 ok (250) <--
> > subscription duration = 250
> > NOTIFY (400) <--
> > 200 ok -->
> > subscription duration = 400
> > NOTIFY <-- (for the reSUBSCRIBE with x as expires) - This MUST be send
> > by the notifier if the earlier NOTIFY was just an event notification.
> > 200 ok-->
> > subscription duration = x (x will be most likely <= 250)
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Thanks & Regards
> > Retesh Chadha
> >
> > On 11/28/06, Ajit Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hi Dale,
> >> You mean to say that I should reply to the NOTIFY with 200Ok but this
> >> NOTIFY is not going to effect the already agreed upon expire value of
> >> 250. So, their can never be an error scenario with respect to
> Subscribe
> >> duration, as such mismatch can happen anytime, Right..? I was
> actually
> >> thinking it to be an error case, responding with 4xx (may be 488) or
> >> terminate the dialog and send a fresh subscribe.
> >> Any clarification will be helpful.
> >> Regards
> >> Ajit
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 1:19 AM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Calculation of Subscribe Duration
> >>
> >>    From: "Ajit Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>
> >>    Suppose I am already having an established SUBSCRIBE dialog and
> the
> >>    subscription expires after 700sec. Now, I am doing a Re-Subscribe
> to
> >>    refresh my Subscription with a lesser value say 300sec. The
> Notifier
> >>    sends 200ok for the re-subscribe with Expires 250 say. Now I have
> set
> >> my
> >>    expiry to be 250sec. After getting the 200Ok for Re-Subscribe I
> got a
> >>    Notify which suggests Expires to be 400sec, this notify can be the
> >>    delayed Notify of my previous subscription which was supposed to
> >> expire
> >>    after 700sec. Now, how I should respond to this Notify, as my
> current
> >>    expires is 250 and what I am getting is exceeding the value I
> >> proposed
> >>    in Re-Subscribe.
> >>
> >> It's a messy problem.  There was a discussion on the SIP mailing list
> >> a month or so ago, but I'm so far behind on my e-mail, I don't know
> if
> >> a consensus was reached.
> >>
> >> At one point, I advocated that once a subscription endpoint was
> >> established, both the Subscriber and the Notifier would be
> constrained
> >> to only push the endpoint further into the future (except when
> >> terminating the subscription immediately).  That eliminates many
> >> ambiguities.
> >>
> >> In the specific case you describe:
> >>
> >> Clearly, you should respond 200 to the NOTIFY.
> >>
> >> Because the NOTIFY was likely sent by the Notifier before the
> >> re-subscribe, the Subscriber should retain the earlier subscription
> >> endpoint (250 secs.), which was agreed upon after the later
> >> subscription endpoint.
> >>
> >> This policy is safe...
> >>
> >> Dale
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sip-implementors mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> >>
> >> The information contained in this message may be confidential to
> Kodiak Networks, Inc. and its subsidiaries and protected from
> disclosure. If this message did not reach the intended recipient, or an
> employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended
> recipient, you are hereby informed that any distribution or copying of
> this communication is prohibited. If you have received this
> communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the
> sender of the message and then delete the message. Thank you.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Sip-implementors mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
> >>
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>
>


-- 
With Regards
Retesh Chadha
_______________________________________________
Sip-implementors mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors

Reply via email to