14 Sep
2005
14 Sep
'05
7:33 p.m.
I was one of the initial reporters of this "bug"
In my case the issue was the use of Strict routing in the ACK or BYE
message that somehow wasn't caught by the "loose_route()" statement.
The UAC sends the messages with a URI of the SER proxy.
I didn't get a very good reception to my request, i the feeling i got
was that it was passed off an as not important or uninteresting. In my
case i resolved the issue by upgrading the UAC that was sending the ACK/BYE.
I've seen at least 5-6 people report this, with the varying responses
(mostly that there was no issue, when it looked to me that there was).
I hope someone who understands the necessary specifications and also SER
would look into this and quash the issue once and for all (even if just
to diffinitively identify it)
I would be interested in spending some time to try and get to the bottom
of the issue, i will dig up the data from previous emails this afternoon
and see if i can assist.
Rodrigo P. Telles wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Bogdan,
Fistrly, thanks for your answer!
Reading some old posts about 'branch=0' I found some one saying that it happend
because SER forward statelessly, but I'm using "t_relay()" and I suppose
it's a
statefull function, does'n it?
I saw this question many times in serusers maillist but no one answer it!
According with RFC3261 'branch=0' is not a valid branch ID (I know I can use
syn_branch=0)!
Best regards.
- --
============================================
Rodrigo P. Telles <telles(a)devel.it>
Diretor de Tecnologia
Devel-IT - http://www.devel.it
============================================
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Rodrigo,
as I see in that email, the problem is actually a broken ACK which
doesn't match the INVITE transaction and statelessly loops on the proxy
- when statelessly fwded, the ACK gets branch=0 param in VIA.
so, what is your problem? - the actually presents of branch=0 or why it
gets there?
regards,
bogdan
Rodrigo P. Telles wrote:
Hi folks,
I've been experiencing some troubles with ACK's with branch=0.
I found a thread about it but I didn't find a 'solution' folowing the
thread.
http://mail.iptel.org/pipermail/serdev/2005-April/004296.html
Can some one point me to the correct answer for that question?
Thanks in advance.
--
============================================
Rodrigo P. Telles <telles(a)devel.it>
TI Manager
Devel-IT - http://www.devel.it
============================================
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDKEGhiLK8unYgEMQRAlOHAJ4ufRDMaOizWX5TIsdN0aL5WDDypwCdEOZv
GD+1ajtmD7JlabMMG7K0QS4=
=YkTR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users