15 Aug
2005
15 Aug
'05
7:03 p.m.
Hi Michael,
I added in TM some code which should solve this problem - unfortunately
is not tested yet since the scenario is quite difficult to reproduce.
Can you please give it a try a report de output - crash, the same or
success?
thanks and regards,
bogdan
Michael Ulitskiy wrote:
Great! Thanks Bogdan! I'll be the first to test
it.
I just wanted to point out that it's really amusing how responsive
openser developers are and how impressive openser development
pace is. Very good experience so far.
Thanks a lot.
Michael
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 11:32 am, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Michael,
that's exactly the trick I wanted to try to solve this issue (see my
previous email)...but I will have to dig to see how difficult is to
implement.
regards,
bogdan
Michael Ulitskiy wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I guess, you're right. I didn't know that.
Then openser should keep CANCEL in transaction context until transaction
expires (probably until wt_timer expires) and transmit it if provisional
response is received during that time.
Thanks for clarification.
Michael
On Tuesday 02 August 2005 07:52 pm, you wrote:
>Hi Michael!
>
>RFC3261 page 54:
>If no provisional response has been received, the CANCEL request MUST
> NOT be sent; rather, the client MUST wait for the arrival of a
> provisional response before sending the request.
>
>
>Thus, the proxy should withhold the CANCEL until a provisional response
>is received. If no provisional response is received for a certain time,
>the proxy may discard the whole transaction.
>
>Also take a look at section 16.10 and section 16.7 step 10.
>
>regards
>klaus
>
>
>
>