Fw: [Users] TM : retransmission timers

Wed Nov 8 10:06:09 CET 2006

thanks Rao for bringing this up. Actually our company has moved to openser around 6 months ago after reading the rumor spread around on the openser lists that SER is no longer being maintained. Looking now at the new SER I must confess that we are more than impressed  about the new features and substantial changes  to SER. It seems that, unlike openser,  the guys behind SER spent the time not on cosmetic and superficial changes but on real improvements. I assume this difference in working style comes from the fact that openser is lead by a company that is capitalizing the open-source spirit to satisfy the day-to-day needs of it customers whereas SER is being maintained by guys who have a long term vision of things. While it will surely cost us some time and effort for us the decision is already clear that unless openser integrates the SER improvements we will go back to SER.

Bye

Kil Il

Rao Ramaratnamma <raramarat at yahoo.com> wrote: sorry for reposting -- I think this question belongs to both mailing list.
I am really stuck with this.

rr

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Rao Ramaratnamma <raramarat at yahoo.com>
To: Christian Schlatter <cs at unc.edu>; users at openser.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2006 11:15:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Users] TM : retransmission timers

the ser ottendorf announcement does mention improved timers. Cannot openser include this feature too and cannot I merge ser  with openser for good timers? I am still trying to understand the difference between ser and openser but standart compliance seems to be very important matter!

Cannot people provide me with some hints? I am sure that I am not the only who is asking the difference between ser and openser. ser documentation does not appear uptodate, but the software as sannounced appears impressive. I have already asked this question but did not receive any answer. 

thank you in advance!

rr

----- Original Message  ----
From: Christian Schlatter <cs at unc.edu>
To: users at openser.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2006 10:52:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Users] TM : retransmission timers

Greg Fausak wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I believe this is a well known bug.
> Granularity of timers is 1 second.  So, if you sign up for a timer to
> be fired in 1 second it will happen anywhere between 0 seconds and 1 
> second.
> 2 seconds will happen between 1 and 2 seconds.  I usually set up my
> timers to be 2, 2, 4, 8.  There are VOIP providers that are pretty 
> sticky about
> the first 500ms.  If you are using one of them you're out of luck.

Yes, there is a timer process that wakes up every second to perform 
retransmissions. I was actually quite surprised that OpenSER, which is 
known to be very standards compliant, does not follow the RFC 3261 
retransmission timeouts. On  the other hand, the RFC 3261 timeout values 
are just suggestions and standards compliant SIP UA must accept shorter 
timeouts. Still it would be nice if OpenSER would support sub second 
timers, this would allow for shorter fail-over times.

Christian

> 
> I believe SER has made timer changes to support more exact timer
> intervals.  They are a completely different camp, with a different feature
> set (although they share the same roots).
> 
> -g
> 
> 
> On 11/7/06, Jean-François SMIGIELSKI <jf-smig at ibelgique.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I made strange observations about the intervals between 
>> retransmissions with the TM module.
>> In my experiments,  I used the default parameters for the TM module 
>> timers, and I  sent an INVITE that cannot receive answers (it has a 
>> well  known R-URI  pattern that is forwarded to a place and port that 
>> nobody listen).
>>
>> When reading RFC3261, I expected to see intervals between 
>> retransmissions of |500ms|1s|2s|4s|8s|16s|. 7 transmissions, during 32s.
>>
>> But with OpenSER, (I have tested with the debian package 1.1.0-5 on a 
>> debian etch, and the cvs sources for 1.1.0 or 1.0.1compiled by 
>> myself), I can see intervals like <500ms, 2s, 4s, 4s,4s, ... until 26s 
>> are spent (9 sendings). The first interval is sometomes very short 
>> (40ms).
>>
>> Altough I like the sequence of 4s separated transmissions, I do not 
>> know why the first interval is so short, and why there is no sending 
>> after 1s.
>>
>> Did anybody observed such behaviours? Are they normal?
>>
>> Thanks in advance!
>>
>> JF  Smigielski.
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________________________________________
>> iBELGIQUE, exprimez-vous !
>> http://web.ibelgique.com/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at openser.org
>> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users at openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users at openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

---------------------------------
Everyone is raving about the  all-new Yahoo! Mail.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20061108/b692b16c/attachment.htm>