Subject: Re: [Sipping] Rationalisation of hostport/usernames in draft-ietf-sipping-tortu re-tests-01

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:09:30 -0600

Steve -

Most of the diversity comes from the history of managing this
document by hand - in most cases, there's not a strong reason.

Most of your suggestions are, I believe, reasonable. I'll bring
them up in the SIPPING meeting. In general, we should make it
easier to build the plumbing that would let an automated tool
exercise these tests (where that makes sense). 

RjS

On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 06:26, Steve Langstaff wrote:
> Hi All.
> 
> I am looking at automatic testing of a SIP implementation, and although
> draft-ietf-sipping-torture-tests-01 says...
> 
>    "This document does not, however, attempt to be comprehensive. It should
> be
>    considered a seed to stimulate thinking and planning, not simply a
>    set of tests to be passed."
> 
> ...I was wondering if there were any reasons not to rationalise the test
> messages in a number of ways:
> 
> 1) There appear to be a large number of different host names present in the
> test messages where surely only a few are needed, e.g.
> 	c.example.com
> 	example.com
> 	example.org
> 	example53.example.net
> 	fold-and-staple.example.com
> 	funky.example.com
> 	host-of-the-hour.example.com
> 	host.example.com
> 	host.example.net
> 	host1.examle.com
> 	host1.example.com
> 	host1.example.net
> 	host129.example.com
> 	host15.example.net
> 	host25.example.net
> 	host39923.example.net
> 	host4.example.com
> 	host5.example.com
> 	host5.example.net
> 	host59.example.net
> 	host9.example.com
> 	hungry.example.net
> 	iftgw.example.com
> 	saturn.example.com
> 	somehost.example.com
> 	t1.example.com
> 
> 2) Shouldn't the call-ids be unique between messages, except where we are
> specifically testing call-id issues? This would help us associate response
> messages with the appropriate test message.
> 
> 3) Could the URI always be [email-masked]' except where we are
> specifically testing URI issues? This would simplify the configuration of
> the device under test.
> 
> 4) Ditto the To: ([email-masked]') and From: ([email-masked]')
> headers?
> 
> 5) The SDP o= and c= parameters mention about 7 different IP addresses.
> Could this be rationalised down to one?
> 
> Thanks for any feedback,
> 

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