Hi Ankur, Sure will review the RFC Thanks for you reply
On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 11:00 AM, ankur bansal <abh.an...@gmail.com> wrote: > @arun.taga...@gmail.com <arun.taga...@gmail.com> > Please check RFC 5626 3.3 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5626#section-3.3>. Multiple > Connections from a User Agent > I believe you might find your answers here in this RFC which explains > about creating multiple flows > > Regards > Ankur Bansal > > On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 10:27 AM Arun Tagare <arun.taga...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Thanks Ranjit & Paul, >> >> Yes, NW can send ‘n’ number of PCSCF addresses, >> >> Yes, agree Ranjit it’s may be not practical but just wanted to understand >> if that is allowed? Or Nw accepts REG in sequence like >> >> Reg to 1 PCSCF >> Fail/error response from NW >> Then retry on 2PCSCF address >> Fail/error response from NW >> Then retry on 3rd PCSCF address >> Success from NW >> >> So, here UE is Registered success on 3rd PCSCF address. >> >> So, my question is it allowed to send Registration request to all received >> PCSCF at the same time? >> and assume UE registered on the 1 success response from NW and ignore >> remaining. I m correlating Registration flow with INVITE forking responses >> scenario here. >> >> Please let me know if it allowed? >> >> >> On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 at 10:44 PM, Ranjit Avasarala <ranjitka...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi Arun >> > >> > I am not sure how you can get more than 1 P-CSCF address(s) as the >> P-CSCF >> > address is discovered by UE i.e returned by GGSN. So even if we assume >> a >> > scenario where the GGSN returns 5 P-CSCF address, then yes u can send >> > REGISTER to all of them ( but this is not a practical scenario) >> > >> > Then as per the protocol, all 5 P-CSCFs will respond with 401 and the UE >> > needs to keep track of all 5 401s and send REGISTER with authentication >> to >> > all of them. Then if we assume all of them accept then UE is >> simultaneously >> > registered with 5 P-CSCFs >> > >> > so though theoretically this may seem possible, but should not and will >> > not occur in a practical scenario >> > >> > To understand more about P-CSCF discovery refer to 3GPP TS 34.229 >> > >> > Regards >> > Ranjit >> > >> > On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 1:00 AM Arun Tagare <arun.taga...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Team, >> >> >> >> Need some info, can UE be allowed (as per rule) to send SIP REGISTER >> >> requests to all the received P-CSCF addresses from NW (during attach) ? >> >> >> >> For Ex. >> >> If UE received 5 P-CSCF address during attach >> >> >> >> Is it allowed to send REG to address at the same time >> >> UE REG to P-CSCF-1---> >> >> UE REG to P-CSCF-2---> >> >> UE REG to P-CSCF-3---> >> >> UE REG to P-CSCF-4---> >> >> UE REG to P-CSCF-5---> >> >> >> >> <--- 401 from P-CSCF-2 >> >> <--- 401 from P-CSCF-3 >> >> <--- 401 from P-CSCF-5 >> >> >> >> UE AUTH-REG to P-CSCF-2---> >> >> UE AUTH-REG to P-CSCF-3---> >> >> UE AUTH-REG to P-CSCF-5---> >> >> >> >> <-- 200 OK from P-CSCF-5 >> >> >> >> So, UE finally connected to P-CSCF-5 >> >> I know this may increase signalling load on NW, but want to understand >> is >> >> this flow allowed as per rules ? Or there are any restrictions please >> help >> >> on understanding >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> With Regards >> >> >> >> Arun A. Tagare >> >> +91 9449 029729 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Sip-implementors mailing list >> >> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu >> >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors >> >> >> > -- >> >> With Regards >> >> Arun A. Tagare >> +91 9449 029729 >> _______________________________________________ >> Sip-implementors mailing list >> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors >> > -- With Regards Arun A. Tagare +91 9449 029729 _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/sip-implementors