From prag1103@gmail.com Wed Apr 4 00:46:46 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C394321F84A7 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 00:46:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.489 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.109, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ojyK+hwKZV2R for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 00:46:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32CCE21F84A2 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 00:46:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by pbbrq13 with SMTP id rq13so7528pbb.31 for ; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 00:46:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=6kLTZQd9uji7ray/FZcWovi5vo2K3Bn6Q7w8RhwdIQI=; b=kwvJLfa/xkT5F6JX2eDMPf6+7Y0lhbzCZ0bpSm6QxJU6A+2N8VZ0GNtIteQxaB2FDW usZpVfiF5Wc33SrqIger0v7wwjBFgTxBjbO1m27AunjHEYgWYWy4esORJZckzkDu7Np/ 9BhNmwwhY23o70Rm0xI+b5CP43ESOvXGNvAGK7ro5/CH7L62YLFXfplM5m9eXGJN6i8j aQvn+J/SWWt2YfPllnk5kOfzBnRId2EI+jCW5Ka3Y0+tGIGubqjRIpb38Pz1P35A5Mkt diSE9XwmWNICXtDM2AuWe5cQ+s9khyMbiz0cIFBKkxbs0MDzQMGiNmq9Js4ZfKRqmSAs 0kwQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.200.104 with SMTP id jr8mr31996681pbc.164.1333525606046; Wed, 04 Apr 2012 00:46:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.66.234.105 with HTTP; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 00:46:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 13:16:45 +0530 Message-ID: From: prag 1103 To: simple@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b10cff30c1d3a04bcd5a040 Subject: [Simple] What is the correct approach to parser MSRP messages. X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 06:44:45 -0000 --047d7b10cff30c1d3a04bcd5a040 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello Group, I hope it's ok to ask an implementation related query in this mailing group. UA1 is sending 200ok followed by success report, one after the other using two different tcp send calls, however towards UA2 both 200ok and success report are read jointly in a single read to buffer. Is this an expected behavior. if yes, what is the best approach to parse the messages Thanks & Regards. --047d7b10cff30c1d3a04bcd5a040 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Group,

I hope it's ok to ask an implementation related query in this mailin= g group.

UA1 is sending 200ok followed by success report, one after the other usi= ng two different tcp send calls,
however towards UA2 both 200ok and suc= cess report are read jointly in a single read to buffer.

Is this an expected behavior. if yes, what is the best approach to par= se the messages

=A0

Thanks & Regards.

--047d7b10cff30c1d3a04bcd5a040-- From ibc@aliax.net Thu Apr 5 02:43:23 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FBDF21F8687 for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 02:43:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.608 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.608 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id K0fcgS77r1p3 for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 02:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vx0-f172.google.com (mail-vx0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2923821F86EB for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 02:43:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by vcbfk13 with SMTP id fk13so496202vcb.31 for ; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 02:43:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=U1HxNNabBV+PzBUD35p7g2Uv+90JDU+RdszUET1ODAc=; b=Gw+slWj+RR5DBovdfUGKhcvpn1lpjPEbPbT7GL+zR3sfq1qBupgA9HeqpIzJa0rEiQ YzTNejOzjRym4pS2yZdSC1aUw/dhXePlWUwzBeu77ZeDFYsZ3dq7B0lR/GXic83AsrU8 eIaLL1sti8b4hs5pQLtuFqvUFxxH3a7XI3d2hdC0g8t4l/VNZmrtSPOb6Ck+8IXqet1W RvjzCvuqm1ilYGRrtlZJU6n+mlA4p55dy/qkRh8z6xgNKBBWUuCZRk3sj8KIJHtDCYpy eUMc8MqgHHjawhktCrlOjYzTVx4dll5AGZdRCDpV7YEQn7KxIHrcu6kts1U01f8CtqRE kWxA== Received: by 10.52.22.148 with SMTP id d20mr1141978vdf.102.1333619001549; Thu, 05 Apr 2012 02:43:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.170.165 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Apr 2012 02:43:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: =?UTF-8?Q?I=C3=B1aki_Baz_Castillo?= Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:43:01 +0200 Message-ID: To: prag 1103 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl+XaQX5e1JrVk4bXrTyMLBkbrcAhxdjcHLNXJKOdmmrg2rKnYX4u+0xipBDRdpLq75HdqW Cc: simple@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Simple] What is the correct approach to parser MSRP messages. X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 09:43:23 -0000 2012/4/4 prag 1103 : > I hope it's ok to ask an implementation related query in this mailing gro= up. > > UA1 is sending 200ok followed by success report, one after the other usin= g > two different tcp send calls, > however towards UA2 both 200ok and success report are read jointly in a > single read to buffer. > > Is this an expected behavior. if yes, what is the best approach to parse = the > messages Anyone. TCP is not a message boundary transport protocol (as UDP or SCTP are) so you must *never* rely on receiving a complete/single application level message in a TCP packet. You could receive a TCP packet with an incomplete application message so you must wait for a new TCP packet containing the rest. That is TCP. Regards. PS: However this question fits better in sip-implementor maillist. --=20 I=C3=B1aki Baz Castillo From internet-drafts@ietf.org Tue Apr 17 03:24:38 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EB8121F8584; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 03:24:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.514 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.514 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.085, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uD8hdHGW0w+p; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 03:24:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F075521F85AF; Tue, 17 Apr 2012 03:24:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.00 Message-ID: <20120417102433.21970.88184.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 03:24:33 -0700 Cc: simple@ietf.org Subject: [Simple] I-D Action: draft-ietf-simple-msrp-cema-04.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:24:38 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presenc= e Leveraging Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : Connection Establishment for Media Anchoring (CEMA) for = the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) Author(s) : Christer Holmberg Staffan Blau Eric Burger Filename : draft-ietf-simple-msrp-cema-04.txt Pages : 21 Date : 2012-04-17 This document defines a Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) extension, Connection Establishment for Media Anchoring (CEMA). Support of the extension is optional. The extension allows middleboxes to anchor the MSRP connection, without the need for middleboxes to modify the MSRP messages, and thus also enables a secure end-to-end MSRP communication in networks where such middleboxes are deployed. The document also defines a Session Description Protocol (SDP) attribute, 'msrp-cema', that MSRP endpoints use to indicate support of the CEMA extension. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-msrp-cema-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-msrp-cema-04.txt From internet-drafts@ietf.org Wed Apr 18 13:13:09 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C55D421F84D2; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:13:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.403 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.403 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.196, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i7KM444SbrgP; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:13:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578E421F84C8; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:13:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.00 Message-ID: <20120418201305.6559.74496.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:13:05 -0700 Cc: simple@ietf.org Subject: [Simple] I-D Action: draft-ietf-simple-simple-07.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:13:09 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presenc= e Leveraging Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : SIMPLE made Simple: An Overview of the IETF Specificatio= ns for Instant Messaging and Presence using the Session Initiation Protocol= (SIP) Author(s) : Jonathan Rosenberg Filename : draft-ietf-simple-simple-07.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2012-04-18 The IETF has produced many specifications related to Presence and Instant Messaging with the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). Collectively, these specifications are known as SIMPLE - SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions. This document serves as a guide to the SIMPLE suite of specifications. It breaks them up into categories and explains what each is for and how they relate to each other. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-simple-07.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-simple-07.txt