Hi,
In my opinion, if the MG receives the
same request within the LONG-TIMER seconds from MGC,
then there are following two scenarios:
1. MG has received the Response Ack:
Here MG should ignore the request
2. MG has not received the Response
Ack: Here MG should resend the reply.
Snips from Protocol section D.1.1
Peer
protocol entities are expected to keep in memory a list of the responses
that they sent to recent
transactions
and a list of the transactions that are currently outstanding. The TransactionID
of each
incoming
message is compared to the TransactionIDs of the recent responses sent
to the same MID.
If
a match is found, the entity does not execute the transaction, but simply
repeats the response.
The
copy of the responses may be destroyed either LONG-TIMER seconds after
the response is
issued,
or when the entity receives a confirmation that the response has been received,
through the
"Response
Acknowledgement parameter". For transactions that are acknowledged
through this
parameter,
the entity shall keep a copy of the TransactionID for LONG-TIMER seconds
after the
response
is issued, in order to detect and ignore duplicate copies of the transaction
request that
could
be produced by the network
Regards,
Sudhanshu Garg
Technical Leader
Aricent
Phone: +91-124-4176333 extn 5109
Fax: +91-124-4176224
web: www.aricent.com
| Dheeraj Gupta <dhgupta <at> cisco.com>
02/07/2007 10:27 AM
|
|
To
|
<krishna.poreddy <at> wipro.com>,
<megaco <at> ietf.org>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
|
RE: [Megaco] Megaco 3-Way
Handshake |
|
Hi Krishna,
As per AnnexD.1.1 , GW can use
the same transaction ID , after it removes the response on expiry of LONG-TIMER
or when it receives a ACK from MGC for the response it sends to it i.e
3-Way handshake comletes.
While AnnexD.1.2.2 says that there
is no point for MGC to send ACK for the response by GW , after expiry of
LONG-TIMER as by that time GW must have deleted the response from its database.
MG should ignore the request if
it receives the same request within the LONG-TIMER seconds from MGC.
Thanks
Dheeraj
From: krishna.poreddy <at> wipro.com [mailto:krishna.poreddy <at> wipro.com]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 8:17 PM
To: megaco <at> ietf.org
Subject: [Megaco] Megaco 3-Way Handshake
Hi,
I am currently working in a H.248 development
project.
As per the ITU-T H.248.1 AnnexD.1.1, the
copy of the responses may be destroyed either LONG-TIMER seconds after
the response is isuued, or when the entity receives a Ack for the response.
Hence we can re-use the same TransId after
destroying the Response copy.
But in D.1.2.2 it was stated that the “conformed
Transaction ID ranges” values shall not be used if more than LONG-TIMER
seconds have elapsed since the MG issued its last response to that MGC.
One more question: If we receive a duplicate
request with in the LONG-TIMER seconds from MGC, how the MG should behave.
1.
Resend the reply
or
2.
ignore the request
Can anyone please clarify the above.
Thanks & Regards,
Krishna
_______________________________________________
Megaco mailing list
Megaco <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/megaco
*********************** Aricent-Private ***********************
| "DISCLAIMER: This message is proprietary to Aricent and is intended solely for the use of
the individual to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged or confidential information and should not be
circulated or used for any purpose other than for what it is intended. If you have received this message in error,
please notify the originator immediately. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that you are strictly
prohibited from using, copying, altering, or disclosing the contents of this message. Aricent accepts no responsibility for
loss or damage arising from the use of the information transmitted by this email including damage from virus."
|
RSS Feed