[OpenSER-Users] No answers whatssoever??

[Bogdan-Andrei Iancu]

Hi Inaki,

Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
> El Wednesday 27 February 2008 11:04:00 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu escribió:
>   
>> Hi Taisto,
>>
>> As mentioned in a previous email, the RFC3261 says that the 200OK ACK
>> forms a separate transaction:
>>
>> 17 Transactions (page 122)
>> ....
>>
>>       The reason for this separation is rooted in the importance of
>>       delivering all 200 (OK) responses to an INVITE to the UAC.  To
>>       deliver them all to the UAC, the UAS alone takes responsibility
>>       for retransmitting them (see Section 13.3.1.4), and the UAC alone
>>       takes responsibility for acknowledging them with ACK (see Section
>>       13.2.2.4).  Since this ACK is retransmitted only by the UAC, it is
>>       effectively considered its own transaction.
>> .....
>>
>>
>> And OpenSER is doing this - 200OK ACK is not part of the INVITE
>> transaction.
>>
>> Now, about destroying the INVITE transaction after 200OK, I not sure if
>> the RFC really states this. The RFC says the transaction is completed
>> with the 200 OK, but not destroyed - this is more or less an
>> implementation option, in my opinion.
>>     
>
> Hi Bogdan, about that there is lot of info in this draft:
>
>   http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sparks-sip-invfix
>
> It fixes the RFC3261 by removing the need of destroying the INVITE 
> transmission when a 200 Ok is received. Instead it suggests to keep the 
> transacction in memory for a while ("completed" status) to match request 
> retransmissions and other replies in case of parallel forking.
>
> But the original RFC 3261 seems to indicate to destroy the INVITE transaction 
> in the UAC/Proxy when a 200 Ok is received.
>   
Thanks for the update - can you point me this section/page from the 
RFC3261 ?

Regards,
Bogdan