17 Jul
2012
17 Jul
'12
1:18 p.m.
Hello,
sending a >=300 reply is for an not-established dialog, which eventually
can be forked by proxy, meaning many 1xx replies can get to caller, then
many >=300 replies can get to the proxy which will chose which one to
use for sending back to the caller.
Doing a t_reply(...) with a different code than the received one is like
having two branch, one locally and one from where the reply is received,
but you decide to reply from the local one. So if the caller device has
problems with this case, the it will have problems with serial/parallel
forking.
For accounting you can save incoming to-tag in an avp and store it in a
separate column in acc table. But setting the to-tag for t_reply() is
not possible at this time.
Btw, have you tried instead the change_reply_status() function?
http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules/textopsx.html#textopsx.chan…
Cheers,
Daniel
On 7/17/12 2:23 PM, Uri Shacked wrote:
Hi,
Here is the problem with the solution to sending different reply then
the once I receive:
I check if the reply is 603. If so, i did t_drop_replies and then
t_reply with the reply i wanted to send back. 500 with append_to_reply
something....
The problem is that on the 500 that i send back, the to_tag is not the
same to_tag that i received with the 603.
That makes some problems on the sip and lots of problems on the CDR
creation (it is based on to_tag as well).
Any ideas?
How do i make it the same to_tag? Removing a header and recreating it
seems very dirty for it.....
BR,
Uri
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<miconda(a)gmail.com <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hello,
this 503 to 500 is a requirement from RFC, to prevent propagation
of blacklisting/disabling destination hosts. I don't remember
right now any configuration option for it, but you can try to
enforce it from the failure route, like:
t_reply("503", "...");
Cheers,
Daniel
On 6/24/12 4:30 PM, Uri Shacked wrote:
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio Advanced Training, Seattle, USA, Sep 23-26, 2012 - http://asipto.com/u/katu
Kamailio Practical Workshop, Netherlands, Sep 10-12, 2012 - http://asipto.com/u/kpw
I just read the topic - "_Copy reason
field from 503 to 500. _"
Is there a way to change it if i want to send back the original
leg 2 503 reply?
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Uri Shacked <ushacked(a)gmail.com
<mailto:ushacked@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,
Kamailio server is behind our company's softswitch and acts
as a sip application server.
I notice that there are calls that the softswitch replied
with 503 "service unavailable" and kamailio sent to the
originator leg 500 "service unavaileable".
When kamailio recieved 504 or 502 it sends them back as is.
shouldn't it be the same with 503?
It also does not have a "to tag" in the CDR. And the "to
tag"
in the 503 that was recieved is not equal to the 500 reply
"to tag" kamailio sent back.
any ideas?
BR,
Uri
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -http://www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com/>
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda>
-http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio Advanced Training, Seattle, USA, Sep 23-26, 2012 -http://asipto.com/u/katu
Kamailio Practical Workshop, Netherlands, Sep 10-12, 2012 -http://asipto.com/u/kpw