< Previous by Date Date Index Next by Date >
< Previous in Thread Thread Index Next in Thread >

Re: [reSIProcate] DUM state machine


I'm still not clear on why anybody cares when the ACK is received. The
only case where the ACK is relevant to the application is where the
answer is carried in the ACK and in this case onAnswer will be called.

On 11/18/05, Scott Godin <slgodin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Sticking with the "no changes to current apps" philosophy.  Considering
> that onAckReceived doesn't really make sense - since this would not be
> called in the case when the ACK carries an answer - and could be
> misleading.   I vote for onConnectedConfirmed - seems to make more sense
> to me then onConnectReturn.  : )
>
> Scott
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Derek MacDonald [mailto:derek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 12:10 AM
> > To: 'Joe Boucher'; Scott Godin; 'Francesco Fondelli'
> > Cc: resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] DUM state machine
> >
> > onConnectReturn with a default do nothing implementation would be my
> > choice
> > because it would not affect existing application built on top of DUM.
> >
> > --Derek
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Joe Boucher [mailto:jboucher@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 8:14 PM
> > > To: Derek MacDonald; Scott Godin; Francesco Fondelli
> > > Cc: resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] DUM state machine
> > >
> > > Derek, you have a good point.
> > >
> > > From section 5.1 in 3264:
> > >    Once the offerer has sent the offer, ... it MUST be prepared
> > >    to send and receive media for any sendrecv streams in the offer
> ...
> > >
> > > So a UAS who waits to receive the 200 before cutting through the
> media
> > > is technically in violation of 3264. However, I have worked with
> several
> > > PSTN gateways that don't cut the TDM circuit through until the 200
> > > arrives
> > > (early media aside).
> > >
> > > Regardless, I really think two callbacks are needed. One when the
> 200 is
> > > sent, and one when the ACK is received. Call them onConnected() and
> > > onConnectConfirm() if you like (or whatever makes sense).
> > >
> > > Then the app can decide what it does when...
> > >
> > >    - joe
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Derek MacDonald [mailto:derek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 4:31 PM
> > > To: 'Scott Godin'; 'Francesco Fondelli'; Joe Boucher
> > > Cc: resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] DUM state machine
> > >
> > > Here is a reason that onConnected is called when a 200 is received:
> > >
> > > Alice calls Bob:
> > >
> > > Alice                               Bob
> > >  |
> > >  |---------- INVITE ------------>|
> > >  |                               |
> > >  |<----------  180 --------------|
> > >  |                               | <-- Bob Picks Up
> > >  |<----------  200 --------------|
> > >  |                               |
> > >
> > > As soon as Bob picks up the phone the 200 can be sent.  Bob is
> likely to
> > > say
> > > hello as soon as he picks up the phone.  Since media is being sent,
> the
> > > connected state makes sense. User Agents that don't receive media
> until
> > > the
> > > 200 is receive are unlikely to interact well with phone style
> endpoints.
> > > I
> > > believe they also might be violating 3264.
> > >
> > > --Derek
> > >
> > >  -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > [mailto:resiprocate-
> > > > devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Scott Godin
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 5:19 AM
> > > > To: Francesco Fondelli; Joe Boucher
> > > > Cc: resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] DUM state machine
> > > >
> > > > I kind of like this proposal too - it offers more flexibility.
> But
> > > > changing the callbacks now - would effect any current
> applications.
> > > It
> > > > wouldn't be too hard for me to fix up my app.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to hear from the other core DUM designers on this
> one.
> > > >
> > > > Scott
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Francesco Fondelli [mailto:francesco.fondelli@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 6:35 AM
> > > > > To: Joe Boucher
> > > > > Cc: Scott Godin; Steve Robichaud;
> > > > resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Subject: Re: [reSIProcate] DUM state machine
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/16/05, Joe Boucher <jboucher@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > [cut]
> > > > > > I'd say the proper mode of callback behavior would be:
> > > > > > - Calling onAccepted() when the 200 is sent
> > > > > > - Calling onConnected when the ACK is received
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd *really* like this behavior. Actually I have to use tricks
> using
> > > > > timers to
> > > > > proper mark a call as started (from a billing point of view)
> because
> > > > there
> > > > > is
> > > > > no indication of "onAckReceived". To have onConnected() called
> when
> > > > the
> > > > > ACK
> > > > > is received would be great.
> > > > >
> > > > > my 2 cent
> > > > > Ciao
> > > > > FF
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > resiprocate-devel mailing list
> > > > resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
> > >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>