Re: [Sip] Keepalive on media protocols while mute / on-hold etc, & SIP INVITE

Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@cisco.com> Thu, 18 March 2004 23:06 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA14738 for <sip-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:06:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B46a0-0007tC-JJ for sip-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:05:37 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i2IN5atl030325 for sip-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:05:36 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B46ZT-0007f9-Qy; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:05:03 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B46Z9-0007Z9-0u for sip@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:04:43 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA14566 for <sip@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:04:38 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B46Z6-0005RM-00 for sip@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:04:40 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1B46Y9-0005PK-00 for sip@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:03:41 -0500
Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B46Xv-0005NX-00 for sip@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:03:27 -0500
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (171.71.177.238) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Mar 2004 15:08:03 +0000
Received: from flask.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@flask.cisco.com [161.44.122.62]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i2IN2raD001517; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:02:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cisco.com ([161.44.79.74]) by flask.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id AGX22538; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:02:53 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <405A2A9D.2080401@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:02:53 -0500
From: Paul Kyzivat <pkyzivat@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
CC: sip@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Sip] Keepalive on media protocols while mute / on-hold etc, & SIP INVITE
References: <1393468762.1079641347@[192.168.100.5]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: sip-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Alex,

You are raising two separate issues:

1) how the receiver knows the sender is still there when muted
    or on hold

2) how stupid devices like nats and fws know the stream is still
    active (so the path is preserved) in the same situations

For (1), the answer is supposed to be RTCP. Even when a stream is on 
hold (via SENDONLY or INACTIVE) RTCP is supposed to flow.

But (2) is more difficult. Ideally the stupid devices would be smart 
enough to use the same answer as (1). If they don't, then something will 
need to dribble thru the RTP stream.

The issue of what devices actually do this is another matter altogether.

	Paul

Alex Bligh wrote:
> 100% of the 2(!) vendors I have tested do not appear to send any media
> stream packets unidirectionally (when one end is muted) or bidirectionally
> (re-invite when other party put on hold by UA). This appears not to be in
> conflict with any standard. However, I feel (perhaps incorrectly) a media
> keepalive would be useful so intervening NAT/f/w stuff stays open. Clearly
> this is simple in the mute case (as the muted device can just send whatever
> it likes when it likes), but how about in the re-invite case where the UA
> appears to be being told "no I don't want a media stream". Is there some
> way of saying "but I have to send you a very small keepalive media stream
> or the transient entry in my stateful mid-device will disappear, and please
> don't send me port-unreachables either"?
> 
> The other reason this would be useful is it would allow UAs (including
> media gateways) to reliably respond to lack of media stream (RTP etc.) and
> shut down a hanging SIP session - from what I can see with the UAs I'm
> looking at, one side putting the other on hold, or both ends being on mute,
> is going to tear down a SIP session if this sort of switch is enabled
> without keepalives.
> 
> Alex
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> 


_______________________________________________
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