Skip to main content

Re: optionality of SIP over websocket support

  • From: "Lewis, Keith" < >
  • To: jsr359-experts < >
  • Subject: Re: optionality of SIP over websocket support
  • Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:59:01 +0100
  • List-id: <jsr359-experts.sipservlet-spec.java.net>

All,

With regard to the optionality of SIP Outbound I suggest that applications should discover whether the container supports this by checking for the string "outbound" in the supported extension list (see section 3.2). This seems less likely to change whereas the RFC might be superseded some time in the future.

There is no equivalent string for sip over websockets so I suggest we use the supported RFCs list as described previously.

With regard to Tom's question I notice that section 3.3 talks about applications causing the deployment to fail but does not mention how it might do that - perhaps we should expand the text there and add it also to section 3.2

Keith


On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Lewis, Keith < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
All,

It will be important to indicate which of the new material in the JSR359 spec is mandatory for a SIP container to support. In particular we should make it clear that support for Sip Outbound and Sip Over WebSockets is optional.

I suggest that we should add the following text to section 13.

Support for use of WebSocket transports by a SIP container is optional. Containers with this capability must include the string "RFCxxx" in the list of supported rfcs available to applications via the ServletContext. see 3.3 RFCs supported.

Once SIP over WebSockets becomes an official RFC we can substitute the appropriate number in the text above.

Similar text can be included in the section on SIP outbound.

The text above is modelled on what is said in 5.7.1 regarding support for Reliable Provisional Responses.

Regarding the client capabilities specified in draft-ietf-sipcore-sip-websocket-08. I understand that this is seen as lower priority and so is not currently in scope. On the other hand it does not look difficult to implement. I suggest that containers that support the RFC should provide both the client and server functions. This makes it easier for applications to interpret the javax.servlet.sip.supportedRfcs parameter in the ServletContext - inclusion of the RFC means support for all parts of the spec. I note that we chose to implement both sides of the Sip Outbound spec, given that they will often be used together it seems strange not to also do both sides of Sip over WebSockets.

Keith

 
--------------------
Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential 
and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the 
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and 
deleting it from your computer. Thank you. Thrupoint, Inc.
nXaR2cC3






optionality of SIP over websocket support

Lewis, Keith 04/05/2013

Re: optionality of SIP over websocket support

Lewis, Keith 04/11/2013
 
 
Close
loading
Please Confirm
Close