18 Jul
2006
18 Jul
'06
4:57 p.m.
Klaus Darilion wrote:
by default the timeout is almost a day - I do not thing that realistic
calls exceed this value. Also the time out timer is reset by any
sequential requests.
regards,
bogdan
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
not sure if this makes sends - how the UAC is aware of the parallel
forking? the fork is transparently done by the proxy and it is the only
one to manage the branches.
Hi Dimo,
I'm afraid there is no solution for you at the moment - probably the
best way is :
1) do not use that UAC since sending BYE before 200 OK is not RFC
compliant
It is complient. If the call is forked and the UAC want to cancel only
one of the branches it should send a BYE within the respective dialog. 2) configure your billing system to ignore BYEs
without INVITE record.
maybe in the future we will extend the dialog module to have a new
function to check if the BYE matches a current dialog or not.
But this will cause problems for real long call which have timed out
in the dialog module.
regards
klaus
regards,
bogdan
Dimo wrote:
Hi,
The INVITE is still in processing (no OK received) when the BYE
arrives. I relay the BYE to my Asterik which replies with 487
transaction canceled (see attachment).
I am accounting INVITES after i receive their OK.
So i do not account a call start on the INVITE because it is not
OK-ed, but I want in such cases not to account the BYE which cancels
the invite in progress.
I am relaying messages statefully.
Is there any way I can distinguish that the BYE is for a transaction
in progress and not flag it for accounting? I think, that when I
receive a BYE I can use t_check_trans() and if there is a transaction
in progress I will not flag it for accounting.
However, if the INVITE is OK-ed and the BYE comes shortly after, will
there still be a transaction in memory (waiting for wt_timer) and will
the t_check_trans() report the transaction as finished or ongoing? If
it says ongoing then i will not account a BYE I should.
Any possible way I can distinguish a "BYE which cancels an INVITE"
from "a real BYE for an end of call" works for me. Is there any way to
detect that?
Best,
Dimo
On 7/18/06, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan(a)voice-system.ro> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users Hi,
what happens with the INVITE transaction? how does it end from reply
code point of view?
If it is ok, there is nothing you can do - from SIP point of view, it
will be a short call.
If negative, depends of your acc config if the INVITE records is
logged
or not
regards,
bogdan
Dimo wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have a problem with accounting wrong BYEs:
> I have noticed that some UAs like the spa are sending BYE to
cancel an
> INVITE instead of a CANCEL message. Now openser is interpreting this
> correctly, but the problem is with accounting which will account
this
> BYE as call stop. Since there was never OK to the invite, there
is no
> call start and just a call stop which makes my billing very unhappy.
> Is it possible to have something in the accounting module that will
> prevent such "fake" byes of being accounted?
> I am also thinking how to script it in my config, what i have
thought
> of so far is when receiving a BYE to check if there is ongoing
> transaction and if there is, do not flag the BYE for accounting.
This
> however will probably result in some real BYEs not being accounted
> too, because (correct me if wrong) the transaction will still
exist in
> mem for some short time after the OK is received.
> Any help or suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
>
> Best,
> Dimo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users(a)openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------