I am not very sure of the need for this as in my opinion SIP already has ways to achieve this. If the gateway sends say 503, the proxy can try another gateway. The gateway can itself redirect to the new gateway by sending 302 response. The proxy can get multiple gateway addresses by some proprietary routing mechanism or say from the redirect server sending 300 response or DNS/ENUM procedures. Then, the proxy can try sequentially these gateways if the gateway in question does not respond in time. The only concern is that if the gateway being tried is down, the proxy need not wait for 408 (T1*64 sec.) which I believe is too long. Here I see a need for introducing some standard timer say "inter-fork-terminal" timer.
www.veraznetworks.com /Vikram On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 11:02 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: "Raj Jain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Definitely. We had to implement a proprietary SIP extension to solve > this problem in our system. > > Probably unavoidable... > > > I'm also at the IETF. Perhaps we can meet and exchange notes. > > I'm sitting in the BLISS session, toward the front. Why don't we meet > at the break after BLISS? You can call me on my mobile at +1 617 538 4943. > > Dale > > > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
