Re: [Sip] Draft: draft-holmberg-sip-keep-00.txt

[Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan at acmepacket.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sip-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Juha
> Heinanen
>
> that would break currently working nat traversal with proxies that do
> not support CRLF keepalive, i.e., that are not able to response to
> double-CRLF with a single one.

No, I assume currently working proxies for NAT traversal cases have a currently working mechanism, and would use that regardless of this draft, or they'd try this draft mechanism first and revert to previous if it wasn't negotiated.

> a tcp connected sip UA is namely still able to keep its nat binding open
> by sending double CRLFs, because it does get back tcp level
> acknowledgements even when it does not get back SIP keepalive
> acknowledgement (single CRLF).
> if it uses the keep param and does not get back keep=yes, it would not
> send CRLFs and its nat binding would die away.  this is not a good idea
> at all.

Nope, I didn't mean that - I meant if it doesn't get back the keep param then it won't be using this draft, and would do what it would do if it weren't using this draft.  That may mean the UA sends a single CRLF, or it may mean the proxy makes it send Registers, or sends it Options, or whatever.  And certainly manual provisioning overrides this all anyway, as it overrides anything in any protocol.

-hadriel

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip