Re: [Sip] Comments on draft-ietf-sip-outbound-05

[Eric Rescorla <ekr at networkresonance.com>]

"Rohan Mahy" <rohan.mahy at gmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the editorial comments.  Two answers inline.
>
> On 10/29/06, EKR <ekr at networkresonance.com> wrote:
>> $Id: draft-ietf-sip-outbound-05-rev.txt,v 1.1 2006/10/29 19:54:58 ekr Exp $
>>
>> S 6.
>>    comparison purposes.  A Contact header field value with an
>>    instance-id but no reg-id is valid, but one with a reg-id but no
>>    instance-id is not.  If the registrar processes a Contact header
>>
>> When would instance-id but no reg-id happen?
>
> registering for a GRUU (has an instance-id) but not with outbound (no reg-id).
>
>>       however implementations need to be preared to receive STUN
>>       messages which cross a stream buffer boundary, and SIP and STUN
>>       messages which share the same stream buffer.
>>
>> I don't understand what this means. If you mean that any time you
>> call read(1) you might get SIP and STUN messages intermixed, isn't
>> that a basic property of TCP?
>
> Yes, but most implementors do not have a lot of experience muxing two
> protocols over TCP.  This turned out to be a major PIA for
> implementors.

OK. Maybe just say "As with any stream-based protocol..."

-Ekr


_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip