[sr-dev] indicating gruu support

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

On 4/16/12 7:28 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> 2012/4/16 Daniel-Constantin Mierla<miconda at gmail.com>:
>> the parser for supported header was extended to detect gruu tag, but I
>> haven't added the check for it because I had not time yet to look properly
>> over 5626 to see what parts are common in regard to sip.instance.
>> I think that pub-gruu and temp-gruu should not be added to Contact header in
>> the reply if gruu is missing in Supported header. Otherwise the sip.instance
>> wii be used to match registration updates. If anyone can provide a short
>> summary of 5626, regarding the registrar behavior, will be appreciated and
>> can save some time.
> RFC 5626, in the registrar side, states that when the REGISTER
> contains a *single* Contact header with a *single* Contact URI, and
> the Contact header contains +sip.instance parameter (and the request
> includes "Supported: outbound") then the registrar should not check
> the Contact URI for operation in the location db, but instead take the
> +sip.instance value for matching purposes: the Contact URI MUST NOT be
> matched following SIP URI classic comparison.
right, this is done -- if +sip.instance is present, the matching is done 
based on that token for existing contacts of the AoR in REGISTER's To 
header.

>
> Also take into account that RFC 5626 also mentions the ;reg-id Contact
> *header* param. A SIP client could send two REGISTER indicating same
> ;+sip.instance value and different ;reg-id values (1 and 2). When the
> registrar receives a request for the registered AoR it retrieves a
> single binding for all those existing bindings sharing ;+sip.instance,
> probably the binding with reg-id=1. If the connection is closed, then
> the registrar removes that binding and performs failover by using the
> binding with ;reg-id=2.

So, even for same +sip.instance value can be several contact records, 
but with different reg-id?

>
> If there is an outbound proxy between the SIP client and the
> registrar, and the outbound proxy implements Outbound, and if the
> request from the registrar receives a "430 Flow Failed" from the
> Outbound proxy, the registrar should also remove such a binding
> (;reg-id=1) and try another one if present.

Is reg-id special for stream connections (tcp/tls)? Or if there is a 
timeout on UDP, same behavior should apply, ie, remove the contact address?

Thanks,
Daniel

>
>
> Regards.
>

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Kamailio Advanced Training, April 23-26, 2012, Berlin, Germany
http://www.asipto.com/index.php/kamailio-advanced-training/