[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Sip] Question about Poll: Proposal relating to keepalive, TCP, and UDP usage in draft-ietf-sip-outbound
- To: Juha Heinanen <jh at tutpro.com>
- Subject: Re: [Sip] Question about Poll: Proposal relating to keepalive, TCP, and UDP usage in draft-ietf-sip-outbound
- From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy at cisco.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 14:40:13 -0800
- Authentication-results: sj-dkim-6; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim6002 verified; );
- Cc: SIP <sip at ietf.org>, Francois Audet <audet at nortel.com>, Dean Willis <dean.willis at softarmor.com>, Brian Stucker <bstucker at nortel.com>
- Dkim-signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1050; t=1167950436; x=1168814436; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim6002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20<fluffy@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Sip]=20Question=20about=20Poll=3A=20Proposal=20relat ing=20to=20keepalive, =20TCP, =20and=20UDP=20usage=20in=20draft-ietf-sip-out bound |Sender:=20; bh=V2WrxitYU5LmORD9BCCR3NN0MO8XPLUmnlUuf615O8g=; b=Yeq9ulO/oCwuAVB92Z9JyFLjeqUdaasM+dBgxbsyAcK2O9tg3ZDEUl4vcPKAksNq6zjk/y57 Tip+vD07Tl2KsvfuzrofLRNDcuG2cI2TfgZkUS1qRnwXYE2x3vJQo6Jn;
- In-reply-to: <17819.64168.559864.751052@harjus.tutpro.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>
- References: <458F1308.2070601@softarmor.com> <6FC4416DDE56C44DA0AEE67BC7CA43711213EA6F@zrc2hxm2.corp.nortel.com> <17819.64168.559864.751052@harjus.tutpro.com>
On Jan 3, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Brian Stucker writes:
IMHO-- we should be flexible in this regard. Make sure that the UDP
behavior is at least minimally specified in the standard (warts
and all)
and then work outside of standards with customers so that they fully
appreciate (and properly value) what they're getting with TCP that
they're not getting with UDP. At that point I think the whole debate
will resolve itself because the number of implementations wanting
to use
UDP will drop.
i would think that the drop will be faster if there is no support for
UDP in outbound.
-- juha
I don't. The problem is not that UAs don't support TCP. The problems
is that proxies don't support TCP on a large scale. Now we have had
some posts that it is possible to build proxies with lots of TCP
connections but if people want to encourage the move to TCP, I think
the best thing they could do is help people understand how to build
large scale TCP proxies.
_______________________________________________
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