[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Sip] FW: Does proxy need cancel forked non-INVITE req ?

This is aFrom sip-bounces at ietf.org  Fri Aug 22 00:24:18 2008
Return-Path: <sip-bounces at ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sip-archive at optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-sip-archive at core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CF673A677E;
	Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: sip at core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip at core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 760FE3A6403
	for <sip at core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.598
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5
	tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id DsmLdY7JQFXM for <sip at core3.amsl.com>;
	Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:24:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ind-iport-1.cisco.com (ind-iport-1.cisco.com [64.104.129.195])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A823A677E
	for <sip at ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 00:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,250,1217808000"; d="scan'208,217";a="26406863"
Received: from hkg-dkim-2.cisco.com ([10.75.231.163])
	by ind-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Aug 2008 07:24:05 +0000
Received: from hkg-core-1.cisco.com (hkg-core-1.cisco.com [64.104.123.94])
	by hkg-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7M7O4pv024846
	for <sip at ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:24:04 +0800
Received: from xbh-hkg-411.apac.cisco.com (xbh-hkg-411.cisco.com
	[64.104.123.72])
	by hkg-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7M7O2Qq011045
	for <sip at ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Aug 2008 07:24:04 GMT
Received: from xmb-hkg-412.apac.cisco.com ([64.104.123.84]) by
	xbh-hkg-411.apac.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); 
	Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:23:58 +0800
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:24:36 +0800
Message-ID: <F86B91A10B14744E88408E80B8A30EF30371B9D6 at xmb-hkg-412.apac.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Does proxy need cancel forked non-INVITE req ?
Thread-Index: AckDXvpn3wCEqBv7T8Kmh05qpHfYjgAyRYGw
From: "Rockson Li (zhengyli)" <zhengyli at cisco.com>
To: <sip at ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Aug 2008 07:23:58.0898 (UTC)
	FILETIME=[0B258120:01C90428]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=6315; t=1219389845;
	x=1220253845; c=relaxed/simple; s=hkgdkim2001;
	h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;
	d=cisco.com; i=zhengyli at cisco.com;
	z=From:=20=22Rockson=20Li=20(zhengyli)=22=20<zhengyli at cisco.
	com>
	|Subject:=20FW=3A=20Does=20proxy=20need=20cancel=20forked=2
	0non-INVITE=20req=20? |Sender:=20;
	bh=fcoBXXMP55DqIl3XW8aNn3L/3UNL4SN8jZCWRJFokj8=;
	b=QUIV/VSAFk1rntQQunUmRPvMH+UgMJomqWKplB5P+5fGa/IsrfD1grt+XI
	iA7bS1gmX8FmEWP23KWiudKiV7NEWNdDa17IjdmNH2u2xjgoRXnTDThefMIy
	Pyuy1gk190AdeMESwUIVdsWd5PKTyY2AVrZsFWohlwoF6FTKHTELE=;
Authentication-Results: hkg-dkim-2; header.From=zhengyli at cisco.com; dkim=pass (
	sig from cisco.com/hkgdkim2001 verified; ); 
Subject: [Sip] FW: Does proxy need cancel forked non-INVITE req ?
X-BeenThere: sip at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,
	<mailto:sip-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sip at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,
	<mailto:sip-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1732996279=="
Sender: sip-bounces at ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-bounces at ietf.org

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Try to get more comments from this list.
 
thanks

From: Rockson Li (zhengyli)
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:25 PM
To: sip-implementors at lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Does proxy need cancel forked non-INVITE req ?

Hi folks,
 
Suppose a proxy which forks OPTIONS to two endpoints,
endpoint A responds with 200 promptly, endpoint B responds with 100.
 
so does proxy need to send to CANCEL to  endpoint B?
 
from RFC3261,
 
16.7 Response Processing
      10. Generate CANCELs
 
         If the forwarded response was a final response, the proxy MUST
         generate a CANCEL request for all pending client transactions
         associated with this response context.
 
 
it looks proxy MUST do it.
 
However, I wonder if it's really true.
 
since
 
sec 9.1 Client Behavior
 
   A CANCEL request SHOULD NOT be sent to cancel a request other than
   INVITE.
 
 
so why proxy MUST cancel forked non-INVITE req here?
 
thanks
-Rockson
_______________________________________________
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