Home/ Questions/Q 6136599
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-23T17:37:24+00:00

According to the RFC 3261 , there is no timeout for server transactions in

  • 0

According to the RFC 3261, there is no timeout for server transactions in PROCEEDING or TRYING states. As I understand, that means that TU MUST send response to the transaction. However, if TU fails, there should be a way for transaction to know about that and terminate.

Which behavior is correct according to the RFC 3261?

  1. Should server transaction detect TU failure?

  2. Should I add my own timeout? Assuming that client transaction on the other side will time-out anyway, it should be safe to terminate server transaction after some timeout > expected client transaction timeout.

  3. Any other behavior?

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    The timeouts in the transactions are to handle remote failures – network partitions, the remote machine falling over, etc.

    SIP doesn’t tell you what to do in the event of a local failure, like your Transaction-User layer falling over.

    Your TU’s the “brain” of the entire SIP stack, so if it fails, your SIP stack fails as a whole. I don’t think it’s sensible for the transaction layer to attempt to continue functioning.

    Some transactions might meaningfully persist across your application reboot – presence subscriptions, say – while others like calls probably can’t. You might store the state of these “persistable” transactions on disk, and restore them after you restart your application.

    • 0