Woof!

On Thu, 29 May 2008 12:13:15 -0400, Scott Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> How about a periodic OPTIONs request to the remote Contact in the
> dialog?

I dislike using RTCP as a keepalive.  Many do use it for that, but I find it 
problematic 
for several reasons:

1. RTCP behavior while on HOLD is undefined (and unreliable)
2. RTCP behavior while NOT on HOLD is poorly defined (and unreliable)
3. RTCP is a stupid idea that should be banned from the world, and the more
   people use it the harder it is to get rid of.
4. Did I mention RTCP sucks?

Every time this comes up, I bring up SIP Keep Alive.  And Scott reminds me 
that SIP Keep Alive is poorly supported (maybe he feels about SIP Keep Alive 
like 
I feel about RTCP!).

One possibility is a layered approach:

If there is no RTP flowing, AND also no RTCP, THEN peridocially send OPTIONS, 
or some 
other in Dialog request, like, say, ...INVITE? (Sorry, Scott, just couldn't 
resist!)
to attempt to elicit a response from the far end about the state of the Dialog.

Also, as the calls on the bridge are paired...with presumably someone still on 
one 
end of the call.  If they haven't hung up, even if the other end is 
unresponsive,
from everything the bridge can determine, then assume they don't want the call 
torn down.  They'll hang up when they are ready.

--Woof!
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev
Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev

Reply via email to