Subject: RE: [Sip] RE: Comment on draft-fwmiller-sip-00

From: "Samir Srivastava" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 14:25:47 -0600

Additionally, With OPTIONS you can have Require and Proxy-Require. Which
is not allowed in
PING. So Proxies doesn't need to parse complete PING message.

FM, Pl add the implementation guidelines with respect to Optimization
offered. One can find
"PING" string at the start of transport payload with standard compliant
clients.

Thx
Samir

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 7:25 AM
To: Cullen Jennings; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: [Sip] RE: Comment on draft-fwmiller-sip-00

I would point you at the most recent version, -01.  The new version does
away with the retransmission requirements.  The UAC sends a single PING
to a UAS.  If a response is not received within a timeout, the
application is notified and can decide for itself whether to retransmit.
This is definitely different than OPTIONS.  This makes it look something
like an ICMP ping.

Other than that tho, there is a lot of similarity.  I has also been
mentioned that since there is explicitly no body allowed and the attempt
to minimize the headers, the potential for optimizations in an
implementation is greater.

FM

P.S. Looking at it again, I mentioned an expiration interval before
reporting that the ping was not responded to but did not actually
specify a duration  :(   Suggestions?  I'm thinking like 500 ms?

------------------------------------------------
On Sun, 05 Mar 2006 15:47:57 -0500, Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> 
> I don't really see what this PING method does that OPTIONS does not? 
> If the answer is that this can somehow be optimized in ways that 
> OPTIONS can't, then it is missing all the text to explain that.
> 

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use
[email-masked] for questions on current sip Use
[email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

---

From: "Frank W. Miller" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 20:40:25 -0500

> "PING" string at the start of transport payload with standard compliant

There was a suggestion to add the ability to optionally carry Require
and Proxy-Require.  I personally don't think this is necessary but it
needs to be consensed on I suppose.

I will add a section on potential implementation optimizations.

FM