20 Dec
2012
20 Dec
'12
3:32 a.m.
On 12/20/12 8:05 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
19 dec 2012 kl. 23:14 skrev Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<miconda(a)gmail.com>om>:
You'd still have to revert back for replies, otherwise the previous
hop will not match its transactions. Match which transaction if I'm stateless
?? :-)
if everything from Alice to Bob is stateless, then should be ok.
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
On 12/19/12 10:28 PM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
Will try testing a bit more later.
19 dec 2012 kl. 19:35 skrev Daniel-Constantin
Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com>om>:
So, you do:
remove_hf("Contact"); t_relay(); -- and the Contact header is still there? Can
you get the ngrep and logs printed by debugger module with cfgtrace parameter set to 1?
On 12/19/12 7:20 PM, Andreas Granig wrote:
> Hi Olle,
>
> On 12/19/2012 02:43 PM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
>> Yeah, I already have Kamailio sending all kinds of crazy stuff while
>> testing a new platform,
>> using the UAC module. But I wanted to be lazy and change on the fly...
>>
>> Evil stuff happening here. Kamailio is a good test-tool.
>>
>> Now I fail to change Contact: headers. The docs for textops say that
>> remove_hf can remove
>> contact and Remove_hf(Contact) returns true - but the old contact is
>> still there!
Is this about generic operation of removing the contact header, or in the context of
taking it from old request and adding it to the new one generated by uac_req()? For the
second, Andreas pointed to the right direction.
No, changing one and send it away.
Like changing a Contact: in a register that's forwarded. I wanted to make the remark about changing the method
on the fly directly to the incoming request, that is not straight as it seems, because it
has impact on transaction management, the method being part of CSeq header and has to be
restored for the reply.
Ouch. But if I'm totally and utterly stateless, would
it work?