TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

SIP and Fragments: Together Forever?

21 点作者 another大约 8 年前

4 条评论

viraptor大约 8 年前
Unless I&#x27;m missing something, the ending is... weird?<p>&gt; But with SIP&#x2F;TCP, the re-registration storm can be substantial, and disruptive.<p>Why would the endpoints reregister? We can do TCP failover already by replicating connection state between SBCs. It&#x27;s complicated, but should work (almost?) all the time with mostly idle connections.<p>Also, the &quot;use TCP to avoid fragmentation&quot; was in the RFC for what... 2 decades now? This was really frustrating to me when working with VoIP. There&#x27;s no SIP standard: there&#x27;s Linksys SIP, there&#x27;s Avaya SIP, there&#x27;s MS SIP, ... One will be UDP only, one TCP only, one will crash on fragments, another will have really low default MTU.
aviv大约 8 年前
TCP is the way to go. Another benefit is the significant reduction in customer support especially when it comes to residential customers.
评论 #14014312 未加载
MichaelGG大约 8 年前
About 5 years ago I did a large pcap and saw several % of all traffic was IP fragged at under 600 bytes. This was on a popular VoIP reseller platform.<p>Of course, the issues with TCP aren&#x27;t a big deal and SIP should never have specified UDP in the first place.
评论 #14014512 未加载
programbreeding大约 8 年前
As someone responsible for an IP-PBX that is about to reach 3,000 endpoints, thank you for posting this. I will absolutely be planning some pressure testing and setting up monitoring for it.