> I'm looking forward to the upcoming revisions The same I do :) Roland Benny Prijono a écrit : > Okay, thanks for the info. > > So is appending Service-Route to existing/preconfigured route set > the best approach? Any potential pitfalls with this? (I can't think > of any). > > -benny > > > Olivier Beytrison wrote: >> let me quote the book "The IMS IP Multimedia Concepts and Services" from >> Wiley >> >> Page 180 reguarding the 200 OK returned from a successful Registration >> >> "" >> The UE, when receiving the 200 (OK) response, will store the entries in >> the Service-Route header. Whenever the UE sends out any initial >> requestion other than a REGISTER message, it will : >> >> * include the addresses that were received in the Service-Route header >> within a Route header of the initial requests; and >> * include the P-CSCF address as the topmost Route entry in the initial >> request. >> >> "" >> >> should clear your doubts :) >> >> Regards, >> >> Olivier >> >> Benny Prijono a écrit : >>> Klaus Darilion wrote: >>>> Olivier Beytrison schrieb: >>>>> I don't think so. Because th P-CSCF address will be mostly assigned by >>>>> DHCP Option. Because when you're are moving with your device, you move >>>>> from one area to another one covered by annother GGSN, which mean >>>>> you'll >>>>> have to contact a new P-CSCF, this without invalidating your >>>>> registration. >>>> In the 3G book from Gonzalo Camarillo, the Service Route only includes >>>> the S-CSCF (no P and no I). >>> Thanks for joining the discussion, Klaus. I think I must have >>> misunderstood RFC 3608 Section 6.1, which I thought says that the >>> Service-Route headers replace the whole route set configured in the UA. >>> >>> So as a confirmation, is it correct to append Service-Route headers >>> into existing route set? >>> >>> -benny >>> >>> >>>> Nevertheless I think Benny is right: without reREGISTRATION after >>>> changing the P-CSCF the client can not receive incoming calls (still >>>> routed to old P-CSCF using the old path). >>>> >>>> klaus >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org >>> >>> pjsip mailing list >>> pjsip@lists.pjsip.org >>> http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org > > -- Olivier Beytrison Telecommunication Engineer Mobile: +41 (0)78 619 73 53 Mail: olivier@heliosnet.org GPG: 0x4FB83528 http://pgp.mit.edu/ _______________________________________________ Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org pjsip mailing list pjsip@lists.pjsip.org http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org

Hello benny :) Just wondering what you decided about this service-route issue ? Regards, Olivier B. Benny Prijono a écrit : > Okay, thanks for the info. > > So is appending Service-Route to existing/preconfigured route set > the best approach? Any potential pitfalls with this? (I can't think > of any). > > -benny > > > Olivier Beytrison wrote: >> let me quote the book "The IMS IP Multimedia Concepts and Services" from >> Wiley >> >> Page 180 reguarding the 200 OK returned from a successful Registration >> >> "" >> The UE, when receiving the 200 (OK) response, will store the entries in >> the Service-Route header. Whenever the UE sends out any initial >> requestion other than a REGISTER message, it will : >> >> * include the addresses that were received in the Service-Route header >> within a Route header of the initial requests; and >> * include the P-CSCF address as the topmost Route entry in the initial >> request. >> >> "" >> >> should clear your doubts :) >> >> Regards, >> >> Olivier >> >> Benny Prijono a écrit : >>> Klaus Darilion wrote: >>>> Olivier Beytrison schrieb: >>>>> I don't think so. Because th P-CSCF address will be mostly assigned by >>>>> DHCP Option. Because when you're are moving with your device, you move >>>>> from one area to another one covered by annother GGSN, which mean you'll >>>>> have to contact a new P-CSCF, this without invalidating your registration. >>>> In the 3G book from Gonzalo Camarillo, the Service Route only includes >>>> the S-CSCF (no P and no I). >>> Thanks for joining the discussion, Klaus. I think I must have >>> misunderstood RFC 3608 Section 6.1, which I thought says that the >>> Service-Route headers replace the whole route set configured in the UA. >>> >>> So as a confirmation, is it correct to append Service-Route headers >>> into existing route set? >>> >>> -benny >>> >>> >>>> Nevertheless I think Benny is right: without reREGISTRATION after >>>> changing the P-CSCF the client can not receive incoming calls (still >>>> routed to old P-CSCF using the old path). >>>> >>>> klaus >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org >>> >>> pjsip mailing list >>> pjsip@lists.pjsip.org >>> http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org > > -- Olivier Beytrison Telecommunication Engineer Mobile: +41 (0)78 619 73 53 Mail: olivier@heliosnet.org GPG: 0x4FB83528 http://pgp.mit.edu/

Sorry, nevermind my last mail, I should have check the svn before sending it. Thanks a lot Benny Olivier Benny Prijono a écrit : > Okay, thanks for the info. > > So is appending Service-Route to existing/preconfigured route set > the best approach? Any potential pitfalls with this? (I can't think > of any). > > -benny > > > Olivier Beytrison wrote: >> let me quote the book "The IMS IP Multimedia Concepts and Services" from >> Wiley >> >> Page 180 reguarding the 200 OK returned from a successful Registration >> >> "" >> The UE, when receiving the 200 (OK) response, will store the entries in >> the Service-Route header. Whenever the UE sends out any initial >> requestion other than a REGISTER message, it will : >> >> * include the addresses that were received in the Service-Route header >> within a Route header of the initial requests; and >> * include the P-CSCF address as the topmost Route entry in the initial >> request. >> >> "" >> >> should clear your doubts :) >> >> Regards, >> >> Olivier >> >> Benny Prijono a écrit : >>> Klaus Darilion wrote: >>>> Olivier Beytrison schrieb: >>>>> I don't think so. Because th P-CSCF address will be mostly assigned by >>>>> DHCP Option. Because when you're are moving with your device, you move >>>>> from one area to another one covered by annother GGSN, which mean you'll >>>>> have to contact a new P-CSCF, this without invalidating your registration. >>>> In the 3G book from Gonzalo Camarillo, the Service Route only includes >>>> the S-CSCF (no P and no I). >>> Thanks for joining the discussion, Klaus. I think I must have >>> misunderstood RFC 3608 Section 6.1, which I thought says that the >>> Service-Route headers replace the whole route set configured in the UA. >>> >>> So as a confirmation, is it correct to append Service-Route headers >>> into existing route set? >>> >>> -benny >>> >>> >>>> Nevertheless I think Benny is right: without reREGISTRATION after >>>> changing the P-CSCF the client can not receive incoming calls (still >>>> routed to old P-CSCF using the old path). >>>> >>>> klaus >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org >>> >>> pjsip mailing list >>> pjsip@lists.pjsip.org >>> http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org > > -- Olivier Beytrison Telecommunication Engineer Mobile: +41 (0)78 619 73 53 Mail: olivier@heliosnet.org GPG: 0x4FB83528 http://pgp.mit.edu/

Sorry for not coming back to the list with the info. So yeah, for now I use the append approach, so the Service-Route will be appended to both outbound and account proxies. I prefer this one since it is simpler, no need to add new option, and it is somewhat backward compatible with existing config. But if it proves to be the wrong choice I'm willing to consider the alternative (adding --acc-outbound option). cheers, -benny Olivier Beytrison wrote: > Sorry, nevermind my last mail, I should have check the svn before > sending it. > > Thanks a lot Benny > > Olivier > > Benny Prijono a écrit : >> Okay, thanks for the info. >> >> So is appending Service-Route to existing/preconfigured route set >> the best approach? Any potential pitfalls with this? (I can't think >> of any). >> >> -benny

I've been thinking about it yesterday again, and when you take in consideration the whole concept of the Service-Route header (at least in an IMS architecture), it makes sense. During a registration on IMS 1. the UA send the initial register to the P-CSCF 2. the P-CSCF locates the I-CSCF through NAPTR/SRV requests 3. the P-CSCF forwards the REGISTER to the I-CSCF 4. the I-CSCF interrogate the HSS to discover which S-CSCF should serve this Private Address 5. the I-CSCF forwards the REGISTER to the S-CSCF 6. the S-CSCF process the request and add the Service-Route in the answer So the goal of the Service-Route is to avoid all this process to locate the correct S-CSCF which should serve this request, by having the UA appending it to the Route header in all request after a Register. this doesn't change the fact that, from where you're connecting, you need to go through a small SIP proxy which acts like an application-level firewall. And this SIP proxy should be an outbound_proxy. Anyway, thx for the modification Have a nice sunday Olivier Benny Prijono a écrit : > Sorry for not coming back to the list with the info. So yeah, for > now I use the append approach, so the Service-Route will be appended > to both outbound and account proxies. I prefer this one since it is > simpler, no need to add new option, and it is somewhat backward > compatible with existing config. But if it proves to be the wrong > choice I'm willing to consider the alternative (adding > --acc-outbound option). > > cheers, > -benny > > Olivier Beytrison wrote: >> Sorry, nevermind my last mail, I should have check the svn before >> sending it. >> >> Thanks a lot Benny >> >> Olivier >> >> Benny Prijono a écrit : >>> Okay, thanks for the info. >>> >>> So is appending Service-Route to existing/preconfigured route set >>> the best approach? Any potential pitfalls with this? (I can't think >>> of any). >>> >>> -benny > > > > _______________________________________________ > Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org > > pjsip mailing list > pjsip@lists.pjsip.org > http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org -- Olivier Beytrison Telecommunication Engineer Mobile: +41 (0)78 619 73 53 Mail: olivier@heliosnet.org GPG: 0x4FB83528 http://pgp.mit.edu/