Re: [Serusers] loose_route question

Thanks Jan,

So the loose_route function only check to see if the "lr" parameter is in the Route Header? It does not insert or modify any Route Headers?

Regards, Ricardo

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jan Janak" jan@iptel.org To: "Ricardo Villa" ricvil@epm.net.co Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 7:49 AM Subject: Re: [Serusers] loose_route question

Hello,

the reason why we use the condition below is that there were (and probably still are) some user agents that strip parameters (including lr) from Route header fields.

loose_route function returns 1 if the message being processed will be sent to a different destination than Request-URI. In this case if one of user agents would strip ;lr parameters and the request spirals through the proxy, strange things could happend without the condition.

So the condition is there to deal with broken user agents.

Jan.

On 04-08 20:37, Ricardo Villa wrote:

...

Hi,

I would like to understand a little bit better the "loose route"

concept. I have seen 2 different configs for ser:

...

Sometimes the config has just: loose_route();

...and sometimes it has:

   if (loose_route()) {
            t_relay();
            break;
    };

How exactly do these 2 differ? The README says: "The function performs

loose routing as defined in RFC3261", but why would I put a t_relay() after checking for loose_route()?

...

What I can tell so far is that loose routing leaves the next hop in the

Route header, but I don't understand which one of the above two examples actually tell SER to do that.

...

Thanks, Ricardo Villa

...

---

Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

---

Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers