[SIPForum-techwg] TCP vs. UDP (actually, SIPconnect does *not* change SIP)

[Eric Burger]

(1) I think you mean TCP is the default.

(2) What do we gain by mentioning UDP at all?  If there are 507 test  
cases for SIPconnect stuff, mentioning UDP means there are now 1014  
test cases (507 for SIPconnect with TCP, 507 for SIPconnect with UDP).

Yes, not mentioning UDP, but still supporting RFC 3261, means you  
don't get to not do UDP.  However, it makes SIPconnect compliance  
testing and verification much easier.

[507 is just a random number; pick your guess as to what is the right  
number.  The factor of two does not go away.]


On May 18, 2008, at 1:36 PM, Richard Shockey wrote:

>
>>
>> I agree.  This was my concern when I read MUST TCP, but only MAY UDP
>> in
>> the document.
>>
>> I believe it is perfectly acceptable to say that SIPconnect compliant
>> devices MUST support TCP, but there are a lot of UDP only devices in
>> use
>> within networks right now.  These need to keep working when connected
>> with SIPconnect 1.1 compliant devices or no enterprise or service
>> provider will have any interest in it.
>>
>> To my mind that means that both TCP and UDP are MUSTs.  But, perhaps
>> TCP
>> should be RECOMMENDed as the default transport (with UDP as a fall-
>> back)?
>
>
> Chair hat off. Yes .. both are MUST but STRONGLY RECOMMENDED that  
> UDP is the
> default.
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Peter
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> techwg mailing list
> Send mail to: techwg at sipforum.org
> Unsubscribe or edit options at:  http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/techwg