[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       sip-implementors
Subject:    Re: [Sip-implementors] Route-set?
From:       Manjunath Warad <manjunathwarad () huawei ! com>
Date:       2007-10-31 10:20:03
Message-ID: 00c401c81ba5$ecfebb50$5318120a () china ! huawei ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Vikram,
	Its true, I used wrong term as 'target-refresh'! It cannot update
the Route-Set would be correct.

Regards,
Manju 


****************************************************************************
***********
This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI,
which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed
above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including,
but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or
dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is
prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by
phone or email immediately and delete it!
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Vikram Chhibber [mailto:vikram.chhibber@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 3:34 PM
To: manjunathwarad@huawei.com
Cc: Anshuman S. Rawat; sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Route-set?

One correction. refresh-SUBSCRIBE is a target-refresh request as it can be
used to modify the Contact but Route set once established by initial
SUBSCRIBE never changes.

On Oct 31, 2007 1:07 PM, Manjunath Warad <manjunathwarad@huawei.com> wrote:
> Hi Anshuman,
>
>         Neither Notify nor refresh-SUBSCRIBE is considered as target 
> refreshing request, so both cannot update the Route-set. Initial 
> Route-set formed by SUBSCRIBE/200-SUBSCRIBE/NOTIFY MUST be used for 
> subsequent requests.
>
> Regards,
> Manju
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> ******
> ***********
> This e-mail and attachments contain confidential information from 
> HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address 
> is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any 
> way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, 
> reproduction, or
> dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient's) is 
> prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the 
> sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sip-implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> [mailto:sip-implementors-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of 
> Anshuman S. Rawat
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 12:25 PM
> To: sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> Subject: [Sip-implementors] Route-set?
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have seen this issue with PJSIP stack 0.7.0  and want to know if my 
> understanding about route-set is correct. I have described the problem 
> below.
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong.
>
> Thanks,
> Anshuman
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Anshuman S. Rawat
> To: pjsip@lists.pjsip.org
> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 4:21 PM
> Subject: Route-set issue?
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am using PJ SIP version 0.7.0 and am noticing a behavior which I 
> consider incorrect.I am working presence library and what seems to be 
> happenning is that the notifier and subscriber seem to be destroying 
> the route-set formed by the initial 'SUBSCRIBE' request. I have the 
> relevant part of ethereal log
>
> of both ends attached here.
>
> >From the log one can see that
> - the initial SUBSCRIBE was received with a 'RECORD-ROUTE' header and 
> hence a route-set is formed which is later used by the NOTIFY.
> - When the subscription is refreshed with another SUBSCRIBE request 
> (2nd subscribe request - which now uses the route-set formed by the 
> 1st SUBSCRIBE), the NOTIFY request is sent without any 'ROUTE' header 
> i.e. it does not use the route-set? Is this the correct behaviour?
> - When another SUBSCRIBE is sent by the subscriber (3rd subscribe 
> request), it does not use the route-set formed by the initial 
> SUBSCRIBE (no ROUTE header present). Is this correct?
>
> >From my understanding the route-set should have been used by all the
> SUBSCRIBE/NOTIFYs till the subscription expires. I have 2 PJSIP based 
> UAs behind the same NAT and the proxy is public. As a result, when the 
> above requests do not use the route-set (which by-passes the proxy), 
> the requests are not received at the other end.
>
> Has anyone else noticed the issue? Please correct me if my 
> understanding is incorrect. It would also help if someone could point 
> out where the route-set
>
> is created and destroyed in the source.
>
> Thanks,
> Anshuman
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip-implementors mailing list
> Sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]