[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Sip] Impossible to use real persistent connection with sip
- To: Christian Jansson <christian.jansson@hotsip.com>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
- Subject: Re: [Sip] Impossible to use real persistent connection with sip
- From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@lucent.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 11:44:34 -0600
- Cc: "Colasanto, Eric (Eric)" <ecolasanto@lucent.com>, James Ford <james_s_ford@hotmail.com>, "Jain, Rajnish (Rajnish)" <rajnishjain@lucent.com>, sip@ietf.org, Sarit Galanos Mekler <Sarit@radvision.com>
- List-help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
- List-id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
- List-post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
- List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,<mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,<mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- Organization: Lucent Technologies, Inc./Bell Laboratories
- References: <FE03AFC4B33E7447979123987BD65F45141E53@exchange.hotsip.com>
- Sender: sip-admin@ietf.org
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
Christian Jansson wrote:
Section 18 of rfc3261 correctly instructs implementors to
close connections after a certain time (64*T1).
No, it does not. Section 18 does not say when to close sockets,
That's your interpretation. When I read the following sentence from
section 18:
"It is RECOMMENDED that connections be kept open for some
implementation-defined duration..."
It implies to me that after the duration has passed, the entity is
free to close the socket.
but
rather that you should not close the socket to soon. So if you feel like
it, you could leave the connection open forever.
I am afraid I don't read it that way; i.e. leave the connection open
forever.
Not needed. Close the socket when you have to, and probably it will be
more effective to keep it open for a while in case you need it again (as
Cullen Jennings wrote).
Exactly how long is the question. For some peering arrangements between
service providers and for UACs always using a default outbound proxy,
does it make sense to leave TCP/TLS sockets open for a longer time than
a transaction. That is the crux of the problem.
Cullen Jennings writes:
Hmm - I did not read 3261 quite that way.
I thought it was more along the lines of what you want to get too where
it is up to the proxy and UA to make intelligent decision about when to
close a connection. I think it would be good to provide some information
level advice about schemes UA and Proxies might want to use to do a good
job of this.
Right; or schemes between proxies.
If this required more information to be passed between them to do a
good job of it that would be interesting but without seeing the
scheme it is hard to see that they need any more information than
they have today.
Fair enough. Folks on the CC list (except sip@ietf.org :-)) are working
on an I-D and it'll be available as soon as they are done.
Thanks,
- vijay
--
Vijay K. Gurbani vkg@{lucent.com,research.bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Wireless Networks Group/Internet Software and Services
Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs Innovations, 2000 Lucent Lane, Rm 6G-440
Naperville, Illinois 60566 Voice: +1 630 224 0216
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip