Re: Is REFER within dialog part of INVITE or subscription usage? (was RE: SIP INFO)

"Doken, Serhad" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sip
Message-ID <ED88AAAE8B3D764B9FD8558DE1775B69139274F552@NASANEXMB09.na.qualcomm.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 6:33 PM
> To: Dale Worley
> Cc: SIP IETF; Brett Tate
> Subject: Re: [Sip] Is REFER within dialog part of INVITE or
> subscription usage? (was RE: SIP INFO)
> 
> 
> 
> Dale Worley wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 08:18 -0700, Brett Tate wrote:
> >> Everyone: Is REFER within dialog part of INVITE usage, SUBSCRIPTION
> >> usage, or neither?
> >>
> >> I'm asking mainly because of REFER 481 impacts; however the answer
> >> also has potential implications concerning draft-ietf-sip-info-
> events.
> >> RFC 5057 appears to imply that it is part of the subscription usage;
> >> however I'm not positive if my interpretation and/or RFC 5057 is
> >> correct.
> >>
> >> If REFER isn't considered part of the INVITE usage, how should REFER
> >> 481 be interpreted?  More specifically, should receiver of REFER 481
> >> send BYE?
> >
> > I would argue that the REFER is part of the INVITE usage, because
> REFER
> > in that context is intimately related to the INVITE usage -- it is
> > intended to transfer the INVITE usage/dialog transferred to a
> different
> > destination.
> 
> Well, I guess there is that implied association. (Part of the "do what
> *I* had in mind" approach that REFER has.) Since this was never spelled
> out, it could also be simply "while this isn't part of an INVITE usage,
> if there happens to be an INVITE usage, please refer that one."
> 
> I guess the question is: would it be valid to send a REFER within an
> existing dialog that had no INVITE usage? If it were valid, presumably

Yes, I think so.


> it would have the same meaning as sending one outside a dialog, except
> that the resulting subscription would share the dialog. I expect that
> is
> a usage it would be difficult to find in the wild.

Consider a third party control application that forces an endpoint to register :

REFER sip:phone.doken.com SIP/2.0
Refer-To: <sip:[email protected];method=REGISTER>

that triggers a REG to the registrar as :

REGISTER sip:[email protected] SIP/2.0

> 
> Ah, but now I want to reconsider. Remember that REFER can take a method
> name. So, rather than referring an INVITE, I could be referring
> MESSAGE,
> OPTIONS, BYE, or maybe (????) SUBSCRIBE. In some of those cases, the
> association to the INVITE usage is probably meaningless. (Of course its
> meaningful for BYE.)
> 
> > And it seems quite safe that if the REFER receives a 481 response,
> the
> > INVITE usage must not be functional any more, since the far end of
> that
> > usage has denied that it can act on the REFER.
> 
> IIRC, 5057 decided that each dialog usage must get its own 481 before
> it
> goes away. I don't think there are any cases where a single 481
> response
> can make multiple usages go away.
> 
> So the important question is whether the REFER is part of the INVITE
> usage and so its 481 takes down the INVITE usage or not. That gets
> especially interesting if  the dialog already had both an INVITE usage
> and a SUBSCRIBE usage. Does it make sense that the refer take down the
> INVITE usage and leave up the SUBSCRIBE usage?
> 
> > Now it's possible that the REFER, if it is successful, is the first
> > transaction of the subscription usage.  But I don't think that has
> any
> > paradoxical consequences, as by hypothesis, the REFER succeeded.
> 
> Yeah, its already so weird, why not a little more weird?
> 
> Also, I think it has recently been clarified that the 200 of a
> SUBSCRIBE
> should not be considered to create a dialog - that its the NOTIFY that
> creates the dialog. If so, then I suppose the same should be true of
> REFER.
> 
> Bottom line: I can live with it either way, but think it should be
> documented one way or the other.
> 
> 	Thanks,
> 	Paul
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
> Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
> Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.