17 Apr
2012
17 Apr
'12
3:47 a.m.
2012/4/16 Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com>om>:
Right. That's for registration failover:
Outbund-Proxy-1
UA Registrar
Outbund-Proxy-2
or:
Registrar-1
UA
Registrar-2
(both Registrar-1 and Registrar-2 sharing same DB).
The UA mantains two registrations alive, same +sip.instance (since
it's the SAME device) but different reg-id values.
NOTE that for this to work, the UA must be provided with two
registration URI's or two Outbound proxies (or more).
Right, or also an ICMP error (if implemented). Outbound RFC 5626 is
NOT just for stream connections, it is also for UDP.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc(a)aliax.net>
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?