[reSIProcate] CSeq is incorrect in NOTIFY generated by DUM on SUBSCRIBE

[Derek MacDonald]

I think we could do something fairly simple(probabilistic) for CSEQ
roll-overs....if the difference is greater than 2^16, say(or whatever the
right number is), and the current remote CSeq is 'close' to the edge,  treat
it as a roll-over.

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Scott Godin <sgodin at sipspectrum.com>wrote:

> I just did a quick scan of the code - it seems that the only time we check
> CSeq ordering is for ClientISubscriptions when receiving NOTIFY requests.
> Perhaps we should add a CSeq order check to Dialog.cxx, instead of just
> removing mRemoteCSeq.  We will just need to be careful about being tolerant
> of CSeq roll overs.
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Robert Sparks <rjsparks at nostrum.com>wrote:
>
>> We don't check for out-of-order requests?
>>
>>
>> On Feb 24, 2009, at 10:59 AM, Adam Roach wrote:
>>
>>  I think (hope) Jason was talking about removing the "remote cseq" field.
>>> I'd wait for him to get to a non-virtual keyboard -- where he can examine
>>> the code himself -- for clarification.
>>>
>>> /a
>>>
>>>
>>> Robert Sparks wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, if there was to be a change, it would not be to use the CSeq from
>>>> the other side, but rather to start at somewhere random instead of always at
>>>> 1.
>>>>
>>>> While I don't really see a need to change to this random start (because
>>>> I don't see any benefit), I'm really uncomfortable with the claim you're
>>>> making here that it might do harm.
>>>>
>>>> (I agree with watching out for unintended consequences in general, but
>>>> for this particular instance, if the change broke some peer, then
>>>> introducing a challenging proxy, for instance,
>>>> would break that same peer).
>>>>
>>>> RjS
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 24, 2009, at 9:52 AM, Jason Fischl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  My gut feeling here is to leave it unchanged. These kind of changes may
>>>>> have unintended consequences.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 24, 2009, at 6:55, Adam Roach <adam at nostrum.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Volodymyr:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the suggestion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In terms of the local CSeq: According to RFC 3261, The CSeq number
>>>>>> space is unique in each direction. In other words, the CSeq in the NOTIFY is
>>>>>> completely unrelated to the CSeq in the SUBSCRIBE. The original code is
>>>>>> correct.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with you that the remote CSeq is not used, and can likely be
>>>>>> removed. I'd be interested to have Scott, Jason, and Derek weigh in on
>>>>>> whether this can be safely removed, or if there are some future plans for
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /a
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Volodymyr Tarasenko wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As I see dum is incorrectly generates CSeq in NOTIFY in case when
>>>>>>> SUBSCRIBE's SCeq was not 1. NOTIFY's CSeq always starts from 2 in spite of
>>>>>>> CSeq in SUBSCRIBE was not 1.
>>>>>>> The fast patch is very simple:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --- resip/dum/Dialog.cxx
>>>>>>> +++ resip/dum/Dialog.cxx
>>>>>>> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@
>>>>>>>    }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    mRemoteCSeq = request.header(h_CSeq).sequence();
>>>>>>> -      mLocalCSeq = 1;
>>>>>>> +      mLocalCSeq = request.header(h_CSeq).sequence();
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    DebugLog ( << "************** Created Dialog as UAS
>>>>>>> **************" );
>>>>>>>    DebugLog ( << "mRemoteNameAddr: " << mRemoteNameAddr );
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, after code review I've found that mRemoteCSeq is never used and
>>>>>>> looks like it could be safety removed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Volodymyr!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> resiprocate-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
>>>>>>> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> resiprocate-devel mailing list
>>>>>> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
>>>>>> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> resiprocate-devel mailing list
>>>>> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
>>>>> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> resiprocate-devel mailing list
>> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
>> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel at resiprocate.org
> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.resiprocate.org/pipermail/resiprocate-devel/attachments/20090224/62a7a776/attachment.htm>