It is abstract of nested transaction in real usage.
"3.1. Criterion description" is the rules. And 3.2 defines the level of sub-transaction in nest transaction, and it is also rules(definition) oriented.
The level of sub-transaction in nest transaction is important, because it form the hiberarchy of the nested transaction.
Using this nested transaction concept, I think it has solved all the problem elegantly and with out any extension and violation.
There are three concept in different levels here:
Base rule: defined in "3.1. Criterion description".
Sub-transaction definition(and its level): defined in chapter 2 and chapter 3.2. Sub-transaction definition is just like "precondition", and can be added for envolution and extension in future.
Use-cases: This solution is not use-case oriented. But use-case oriented testing and inspection are welcome! :)
| "Christer Holmberg"
<christer.holmberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
2009-02-16 19:35 |
|
Hi,
>I also pay high attention to the topic of "rollback of re-Invite".
>As lots of service is implemented on the network using SIP, and
different ways
>may be carried out by different corporations, it's necessary to define
a complete
>and clear method to solve the failure when the unsuccessful re-Invite
happens.
I agree, and we thought that having a generic rule, not related to
specific use-cases, would be the most clear, clean and complete
solution.
>And the problems "Commit any session parameters that have been
sucessfully changed"
>metioned in "draft-gaoyang-sipping-session-state-analysis-01.txt" need
further discuss,
>I think.
The draft does not define a generic rule. It more or less says that
every time there is a new use-case, the offer/answer rollback aspects
needs to be documented for that use-case. I think that is something we
wanted to avoid.
If I understand chapter 4.3.3 correct, it says that if you have a
pending re-INVITE transaction, a NEW modification must be sent in a
re-INVITE request. That way we would get rid of the race condition
problem. That is an interesting point. I guess the question is whether
it's too lake to make such a rule.
Regards,
Christer
-------------------------------------------------------- ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.
_______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for questions on current sip Use sip@xxxxxxxx for new developments of core SIP
