Subject: RE: [SIP] Editorial nit in bis draft

From: Ziyad Nigel-NZIYAD1 <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 15:02:16 -0500

Keith,

Looking at rfc2543bis and comparing it to rfc2616 would lead me to believe
RFC2543bis should read "504 Gateway Time-out". The description of server
actions would be consistent with the original definition and usage of the
504 status code. I suppose the next question is: Does the server acts as a
"gateway or proxy" when the 504 is needed, as intended in the RFC2543bis? I
believe that to be true.

RFC2543bis reads:

7.5.5 504 Server Time-out
   The server did not receive a timely response from the server (e.g., a
   location server) it accessed in attempting to process the request.
   Note that 408 (Request Timeout) should be used if there was no
   response within the period specified in the Expires header field from
   the upstream server.

RFC 2616    reads:

10.5.5 504 Gateway Timeout

   The server, while acting as a gateway or proxy, did not receive a
   timely response from the upstream server specified by the URI (e.g.
   HTTP, FTP, LDAP) or some other auxiliary server (e.g. DNS) it needed
   to access in attempting to complete the request.

Dr. Nigel A. Ziyad
Senior Staff Engineer
Motorola GTSS--Network Standards & Advanced Technology
Phone: 847-632-2098    Fax: 847-632-7912
Pager (2-way): 888-478-0351 or [email-masked]

-----Original Message-----
From: Drage, Keith (Keith) [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 8:04 AM
To: [email-masked]'
Subject: [SIP] Editorial nit in bis draft

Looking at the -02 version of the bis draft.

The text string associated with status-code 504 is inconsistent within the
document.

In figure 7 (the syntactic definition) it is given as

		|   "504"  ;  Gateway Time-out

In section 7.5.5, the semantic definition, it is given as:

		7.5.5 504 Server Time-out

The first usage is consistent with HTTP, but presumably introduces the term
gateway in a form that is not completely consistent with SIP. Whatever
happens, we need to align them one way or the other.

Keith

Keith Drage
Lucent Technologies
Tel: +44 1793 776249
Email: [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
This list is for continuing development of the SIP protocol.
The sip-implementor's list is the place to discuss implementation,
and to receive advice on understanding existing sip.
To subscribe to it, send mail to 
[email-masked] with "subscribe" in the body.

_______________________________________________
This list is for continuing development of the SIP protocol.
The sip-implementor's list is the place to discuss implementation,
and to receive advice on understanding existing sip.
To subscribe to it, send mail to 
[email-masked] with "subscribe" in the body.