Thanks Ankur, not sure if it is implemented in such manner then we should not honor new connection with INVITE?
Thanks, Varun Bhatia > On 29-Apr-2014, at 21:05, ankur bansal <abh.an...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Varun , > I dont think sip protocol will have any issue with this .Means you can use > one TCP socket T1 for Register and another T2 for INVITE. > But if you talk about IMS and specifically IPSec feature then it may impact > . > > UE1--------------------------P1 > --------Register(T1)---> > IPSEC SA created on this socket T1 > ------INVITE(T1)---> > Call established then Tcp connection breaks,need to send register again on > new socket . > ------Register(T2)-----> > new IPSEC SA will be created for T2 > ----Re-invite hold(T1)----------> > <---500 --------------(as re-invite came from old client port so IPSec will > have issue ) > > So here after TCP connection breaks ,call should be dropped .All IMS > communcation should be in same connection as of Register. > You may get some reference in 3gpp spec 33.203 . > > Thanks & regards > Ankur Bansal > > >> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Paul Kyzivat <pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >> >>> On 4/29/14 7:55 AM, VARUN BHATIA wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Brett, is there any specific standard which indicates that INVITE >>> dialog will be using same connection of REGISTER ? >> >> RFC 5626 is the only one >> >> >> Thanks, >>> Varun >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Brett Tate <br...@broadsoft.com> wrote: >>> >>> RFC 5626 will likely be helpful. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: sip-implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu [mailto:sip- >>>>> implementors-boun...@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of VARUN BHATIA >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 6:52 AM >>>>> To: sip-implementors >>>>> Subject: [Sip-implementors] TCP/NAT handling in SIP >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> If the UA is behind NAT registers on TCP and after that it initiates a >>>>> call >>>>> on same connection (may be another connection ?) after some time >>>>> connection >>>>> break now as soon as UA detect that the connection is closed it >>>>> initiates a >>>>> new REGISTER using new connection (It is not changing contact as it is >>>>> listening on default port). >>>>> >>>>> 1. Should UA send a re-invite/update for modifying the connection >>>>> status >>>>> within a call ? >>>>> 2. If No, then whether it is recommended in any of standard that we >>>>> should >>>>> use the same connection for sending any request ? >>>>> 3. Is there any RFC which mention the connection handling between >>>>> REGISTER >>>>> request and INVITE request ? >>>>> >>>>> Any inputs are appreciated. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Varun Bhatia >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Sip-implementors mailing list >>>>> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu >>>>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> This email is intended solely for the person or entity to which it is >>>> addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If >>>> you are not the intended recipient and have received this email in error, >>>> please notify BroadSoft, Inc. immediately by replying to this message, >>>> and >>>> destroy all copies of this message, along with any attachment, prior to >>>> reading, distributing or copying it. >> _______________________________________________ >> Sip-implementors mailing list >> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors > _______________________________________________ > Sip-implementors mailing list > Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors