Re: Question on draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20 draft: multipleflowcreation

I honestly don't know why anybody would want to do both UDP and TCP.
 
(In other words, if you set up a TCP flow, I don't see a benefit in also setting up a UDP flow which you will have to maintain for keep alives).
 


________________________________

	From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563
	Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 07:46
	To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
	Subject: Re: [Sip] Question on draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20 draft: multipleflowcreation
	
	
	Hi
	 
	Thanks for the reply..One more of clarification required..
	 
	So If UA wishes to create multiple transport flows with "sip:primary.example.com"(As specified in draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20#section-13 to honor RFC3261 requirement for message size greater than MTU), would it be OK it one FLOW lands on Host1 and other FLOW lands on Host2?
	 
	i.e for example if "sip:primary.example.com" got resolved into (IP1, Port1, TCP) -> (IP2, Port2, TCP) -> (IP2, Port2, UDP) -> (IP1, Port1, UDP) in that order, and if UA wises to create both TCP and UDP FLOWs with "sip:primary.example.com", then it starts creating TCP FLOW with (IP1, Port1, TCP) and can create a UDP FLOW with (IP2, Port2, UDP) based on RFC 3263 procedures. Is my understanding correct here? 
	 
	In the above example, if (IP1) is down/crashed for some reasons, then "sip:primary.example.com", can never use the TCP FLOW for transporting inbound messages to that UA (Even though the IP1 and IP2 are state synchronized) until User Agent detects the FLOW failure with (IP1) and re-create the TCP FLOW with (IP1 or IP2). Is my understanding correct here?
	 
	Please clarify..
	 
	Regard
	Srikanth

________________________________

	From: Francois Audet [mailto:[email protected]] 
	Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 9:22 PM
	To: Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563; [email protected]
	Subject: RE: [Sip] Question on draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20 draft: multiple flowcreation
	
	
	You would have 2. One for primary, and one for secondary. For each one of those, you would use normal RFC 3263 procedures for determining which SRV record to use.


________________________________

		From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Vavilapalli Srikanth-A19563
		Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 07:57
		To: [email protected]
		Subject: [Sip] Question on draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20 draft: multiple flowcreation
		
		
		Hi
		 
		As specified in section 3.3/3.4 of draft-ietf-sip-outbound-20 draft, If a UA is configured with a outbound-proxy-set with two proxy uris: "sip:primary.example.com" and "sip:secondary.example.com" And for example, "sip:primary.example.com" got DNS resolved in to two SRV records "Host1" and "Host2" and "sip:secondary.example.com" got DNS resolved in to "Host3" and "Host4", Should UA create four FLOWs, One with each host OR just two FLOWs, one with each proxy URI(i.e one flow with either Host1 or Host2 and second flow with Host3 or Host4)?
		 
		Please clarify.
		 
		Regards
		Srikanth

_______________________________________________
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