Re: Transaction timeouts

Hi
> You can be informed of retransmission alerts on the Server 
> transaction. See ServerTransaction.enableRetransmissionAlerts. On the 
> client side of the transaction, there is no retransmission alert.
I'm interested in the reasoning behind this :)
>>     timeOutEvent) method only ever receives Timeout.TRANSACTION timeout
>>     events. How do I make it so my application is notified of retransmit
>>     timeouts? Are they received at processTimeout?
>>
>>     When the destination host is unreachable, the application gets ICMP
>>     unreachable replies to each UDP retransmission. Is it possible to be
>>     notified *immediately* when the destination is unreachable?
>>
> Let me think of this a bit. I could use the public void 
> processIOException(IOExceptionEvent exceptionEvent)   event 
> notification mechansm for this.  How does the UDP socket see this. I 
> think I would have to use  SOCTL to enable ICMP  packets to be seen 
> right ?. Is the feature available on J1.42 ? If not it becomes a J 5 
> only thing which I want to avoid if possible. I will take a look to 
> see if I can hook this in but some hacking from you would speed the 
> process. See if you can hack UDPMessageChannel to get notifications 
> for ICMP packets. Call a dummy method when you get the necessary 
> notificaiton. I'll take it from there.
So it doesn't appear to be a current way to do it? I was more interested 
in whether this was possible with the current implementation. Ill just 
try work around it :D THanks for your efforts!

Currently, TCP 'io exceptions' do not go through processIOException; 
they are caught as a SIP exception in the try catch block of each 
method. So if the UDP "io exception" implemented should they be treated 
the same?
> That would be in violation of the SIP transaction state machine - 
> something that I want to avoid. You can try implementing the 
> setBaseTimer on SipProvider ( currently disabled  -- throws 
> UnsupportedOperation).
So this is a 'requirement' of SIP? I guess so from the RFC. Again I'll 
work around this. THanks again!
>>
>>     Thanks for your help, I'm usually a bit sceptical of mailing 
>> lists, as
>>     questions usually go unanswered, so even if I happen to  find 
>> someone
>>     else with the exact same problem, sometimes there are no replies!
> Have faith. :-)
What I meant here was that this Jain-SIP project is practically a model 
of how all projects should be! Active support, quick replies, a working 
implementation, and most importantly, comprehensive documentation!

Thanks for all your help so far! I'll make sure to acknowledge you all 
in my thesis :)
Andrew