Re: [SR-Users] Same Via Tag for INVITE and ACK on S/L loadbalancer

It can also have a different path than the INVITE, if there are proxies that do not do record-route, so there can be less Via headers than in the INVITE.

By that I am wondering if the ACK relayed via tm module has the same Via branch as , expecting not to be. Maybe in the ACK for 300+ replies...

Cheers, Daniel

On 10.02.20 15:48, Yuriy Gorlichenko wrote:

ACK for successull response is a new transaction. It has to be different. May be it is better to point provider to this?

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020, 14:26 Sebastian Damm, <damm@sipgate.de mailto:damm@sipgate.de> wrote:

Hi,

I stumbled upon an interop problem with a carrier. We have the
following scenario:

Gateway --> Loadbalancer --> Carrier

The loadbalancer generates a Via header for each request. But since it
is stateless, the Via tag is generated for each request. As a
consequence, the Via tag in the ACK differs from the one in the
INVITE. And one carrier doesn't handle those ACKs if the Via tag
differs.

Is there a way to force the creation of a "deterministic" Via branch
tag? For example, building it from a hash over call-id and from-tag or
something like that?

Thanks in advance
Sebastian

-- 
Sebastian Damm
Voice Engineer
__________________________________________
sipgate GmbH

_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users