Hello all,
I have a question/concern about the closing paragraphs of 4.2.2, 5.2.2
and 6.3.2. Each of these paragraphs deals with retransmissions of
NOTIFY requests and resetting the throttle (or force or average) based
on the completion of the previous transaction. Given that the
notifier and the subscriber can have different ideas of when the
transaction ends (up to T1 I believe), I want to verify the reasoning
behind these paragraphs.
Is the point that throttle/force/average not break the retransmission
mechanism or that, for example, retransmissions modify the time
between forced NOTIFYs by the time taken for the retransmissions to
successfully complete the transaction? An example is the case when
the NOTIFY gets to the subscriber quickly, but the 200OK is slow to
make it back to the notifier. Start with a force value of 2 seconds.
The subscriber thinks the transaction is over and is now expecting a
forced NOTIFY 2 seconds from now. The notifier has not completed the
transaction. The next NOTIFY from the notifier can happen anytime up
to T1 + 2 sec.
I agree that throttle/force/average should not interfere with the
normal retransmission mechanism. However, I don't agree that waiting
for the transaction to complete before starting the throttle/force/
average timer is going to give much benefit (or always predictable
results).
Thanks,
Michael.
_______________________________________________
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
