[SIPForum-discussion] What happen in this scenario?

[lakhan patel]

Hi Guys,

Thank you all for ur overhauling response!!

But I am pretty bit confuse.

To add on to the discussion of Expire Header field here I quote:
               Expire header indicates that the "INVITE sender should
receive 2xx response within this time else the Sender may choose to CANCEL
the request" as against the register request wherein the Expire Header
indicates to the registrar for how long the registration should remain
active.

@Karthic
Yes, it is a test case.



On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:07 PM, JEEVANANDHAM KARTHIC KUMAR <
Karthic_Kumar.Jeevanandham at alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

>  Hi ,
>
> Please find my answer inline.
>
> Thanks
> Karthic kumar J
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* discussion-bounces at sipforum.org [mailto:
> discussion-bounces at sipforum.org] *On Behalf Of *lakhan patel
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 20, 2010 9:13 PM
> *To:* discussion at sipforum.org
> *Subject:* [SIPForum-discussion] What happen in this scenario?
>
>  Hi All,
>
> SIDE-A                  B2BUA                  SIDE-B
>    |                             |                             |
>    |        INVITE           |                             |
>    |--------------------------->|(with Expire=0)       |
>    |     100 Trying         |                             |
>    |<---------------------------|                             |
>    |                             |                             |
>
>
> My questions are:
>
> 1. Is the B2BUA respond with *"487 Request terminated"*?
> [karthic]YES
>
> 2. If YES/NO then why? Please give me the explanation.
> [karthic]In RFC3261 section  13.3.1 Processing of the INVITE, explains.
>   "--
>     1. If the request is an INVITE that contains an Expires header
>          field, the UAS core sets a timer for the number of seconds
>          indicated in the header field value.  When the timer fires, the
>          invitation is considered to be expired.  If the invitation
>          expires before the UAS has generated a final response, a 487
>          (Request Terminated) response SHOULD be generated.
> --"
>  According to this statement, It is valid to reject INVITE by 487.
>
> 3. How Expire header works in this case?
> [karthic]In my point of view, there is no sense in setting value in Expire
> header.
>  It seems not compliant to RFC321 section 20.19 Expires
> " The value of this field is an integral number of seconds (in decimal)
>    between 0 and (2**32)-1, measured from the receipt of the request".
>
> So "0" is not valid for Expire header.
>  I too expecting that why such a case exist. Is it a some test case? Is any
> product behaving like that
>
> 4. How the Timers and Expire header are related?
> [karthic]Ref. question 2
>
> 5. Does the B2BUA ignore the Expire Header in INVITE?
> [karthic] Instead of ignoring, I feel it is better to reject by 487 to
> compliant with RFC.
> But it is up to your local policy/requirement to make decision.
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards
> Shivlakhan Patel
> Email: lakhan.p at gmail.com, lakhan.p at hotmail.com
> IBM India Private Ltd. Bangalore
> Contact: +91-9902791177
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards
> Shivlakhan Patel
> Email: lakhan.p at gmail.com, lakhan.p at hotmail.com
> IBM India Private Ltd. Bangalore
> Contact: +91-9902791177
>



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Shivlakhan Patel
Email: lakhan.p at gmail.com, lakhan.p at hotmail.com
IBM India Private Ltd. Bangalore
Contact: +91-9902791177
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20100122/9840a279/attachment-0002.html>