[sr-dev] RLS/PUA concurrency issue

[Peter Dunkley]

I've been playing around with this here and making presence and rls use
TCP instead of UDP seems to help with this problem.  Presumably this is
because using TCP enforces in-order delivery of messages.

To make presence and rls use TCP I:

      * Added a ;transport=tcp parameter to the SIP URI I had set for
        presence server_address
      * Added a ;transport=tcp parameter to the SIP URI I had set for
        rls server_address
      * Set the rls outbound_proxy parameter to
        "sip:127.0.0.1;transport=tcp"


It's not a proper fix, but I think it works around the issue.

Regards,

Peter

On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 13:40 +0200, Klaus Darilion wrote:

> 
> Am 01.08.2011 12:28, schrieb Andrew Miller:
> > I attempted to insert a dialog entry in the hash table on sending the
> > SUBSCRIBE, unfortunately this did not cure the problem
> > 
> > Has anyone any suggestions for the cleanest and easiest method to ensure
> > that the 200 is handled before the NOTIFY?
> 
> The cleanest solution would be to establish the dialog when the NOTIFY
> is received although the 200 OK is missing.
> 
> The NOTIFY can be seen as an implicit 200 OK.
> 
> regards
> Klaus
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sr-dev mailing list
> sr-dev at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev


-- 
Peter Dunkley
Technical Director
Crocodile RCS Ltd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-dev/attachments/20110810/1b3dc0ad/attachment.htm>