Subject: RE: [Sip] SIP instance identifiers

From: "Chris Boulton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:15:24 -0000

>
>This needs to be spelled out somewhere, and a suitable error
>> identified. (I don't know if any of the existing responses works for
>> this. At the least, a new Reason code is likely to be needed.)
>
>Here is the use case for this. The use case is when a UA crashes,
>recovers, obtains a new IP, and re-registers. In this case, several
>things could possibly happen:
>
>1. The registrar accepts the second registration, as per normal
>registration procedures. An INVITE to the gruu bound to that id/aor
pair
>gets translated into BOTH contacts, causing the request to fork. There
>is never any response from the old IP. Within one refresh interval, the
>old contact is removed and all is well.
>
>2. The registrar accepts the second registration, and automatically
>deletes the old one. I believe Brian proposed this behavior.
>
>3. The registrar returns an error. The client fetches the current list
>of contacts, finds the old one listed, and unregisters it.
>
>
>
>Approach 1 is problematic, as it will introduce herfp; any non-2xx from
>the new contact will wait for the 2nd branch to timeout. Its not clear
>to me whether 2 or 3 is more right. It depends a lot on who owns the
>policy for how to resolve the conflict - is it the server or the
client?

[Chris Boulton] My initial feeling here is that it should be the
client's responsibility on receiving a 200 class response with two
contacts + different GRUU's should de-register the one it doesn't
recognize (The one with the unknown instance ID).

Chris.

>
>-Jonathan R.
>
>--
>Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                600 Lanidex Plaza
>Chief Technology Officer                    Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
>dynamicsoft
>[email-masked]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
>http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
>http://www.dynamicsoft.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
>This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
>Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
>Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl - www.mailcontrol.com

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:14:13 -0500

Chris,

See my prior response to Jonathan and Brian. I agree it is the 
endpoint's responsibility to fix this. But the registrar still needs to 
preserve uniqueness of the identifier. Your proposal has the potential 
of having a non-unique identifier.

	Paul