Subject: [BEHAVE] STUN request retransmission example in RFC5389

From: "Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 18:33:57 +0000

RFC5389 section 7.2.1 has an example for STUN request retransmissions. It says:

   For example, assuming an RTO of 500 ms,
   requests would be sent at times 0 ms, 500 ms, 1500 ms, 3500 ms, 7500
   ms, 15500 ms, and 31500 ms.  If the client has not received a
   response after 39500 ms, the client will consider the transaction to
   have timed out.

Should the second sentence actually be?

   If the client has not received a
   response after 31500 ms, the client will consider the transaction to
   have timed out.

Not sure why it says 39500 ms. Is it an errata?

Muthu

---

From: "Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 18:39:06 +0000

Please ignore. I missed this one earlier:

   If, after the last request, a duration
   equal to Rm times the RTO has passed without a response (providing
   ample time to get a response if only this final request actually
   succeeds), the client SHOULD consider the transaction to have failed.
   Rm SHOULD be configurable and SHOULD have a default of 16.

500*16 = 8 sec. So the client waits 8 sec after sending the final request at 31500 ms and times out at 39500 ms.

Muthu

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 12:04 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [BEHAVE] STUN request retransmission example in RFC5389

Muthu