Dear Paul, Thanks for the clarification. The text which made me confused to think like 2 is also correct is as follows,
In section 17 while explaining transactions, "Figure. 4 Transaction relationships", explains about client transaction and server transaction which includes proxy's. Along with that, (since proxies are stateful in my case) and all the transaction state machines are explaining about responses immediately after receiving the request, I confused a bit. Thanks, Kiran. > Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 03:27:59 -0500 > From: Paul Kyzivat <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Sip-implementors] Fwd: BYE request processing in a > statefull proxy. > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Assuming P1 and P2 are truly proxies, and not B2BUAs, then (1) is > correct and (2) is not. What do you find in 3261 that makes you think it > allows (2). > > Thanks, > Paul > > On 3/1/14 12:10 AM, Kiran Kumar wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > I have a confusion in the following scenario. > > After establishing a connection between two peers in a SIP trapezoid > which > > of the following sequence is correct while processing BYE where P1 and P2 > > are statefull proxies. > > > > 1. UAC P1 P2 UAS > > > > BYE -> BYE -> BYE -> BYE > > 200 <- 200 <- 200 <- 200 > > > > or > > > > 2. UAC P1 P2 UAS > > > > BYE -> BYE > > 200 <- 200 > > > > BYE-> BYE > > 200 <- 200 > > > > BYE -> BYE > > 200 <- 200 > > > > RFC 3665 is showing scenario 1. but RFC 3261 does not explain anything > > about proxy processing of non-invite request but indirectly says 2 is > also > > correct while explaining transaction in section 17. > > > > Thanks, > > Kiran. > _______________________________________________ Sip-implementors mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/sip-implementors
