6 Jul
2010
6 Jul
'10
5:36 p.m.
On Jul 06, 2010 at 14:06, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:
Obiously the device is buggy.
But there is also on strange thing at Kamailio: it retransmits the
CANCEL although it has already received 481 response on the CANCEL
request.
The first 481 stops the CANCEL retransmissions, however each additional
provisional reply received after that will trigger a one-time CANCEL
retransmission. That's why you see another retransmission after the 481,
it's the "response" to the 180...
Andrei
regards
klaus
Am 06.07.2010 00:06, schrieb David:
Hello,
Here are the corrected attachments, I sent the email from Window's
wordpad which set it to RTF by default.
Here are proper txt logs.
David
On 2010-07-05 17:47, David wrote:
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users Hello,
I upgraded to Kamailio 3.0 and the CANCEL is being sent after it
receives a 100 Trying, as mentioned in RFC3261 section 9.
I stripped down the config file to the bare minimum so that it is
easier to debug ( see attached kamailio.cfg )
I have included my config file as well as a packet sniff that was done
with ngrep.
As you can see, the packets are in the correct order, but the Linksys
is crying "Call leg Transaction does not exist" despite the fact that
the CANCEL has ( as far as I can tell ) responded according to
RFC3261. I compared the headers that are required by RFC ( The
Request-URI, Call-ID, To, the numeric part of CSeq, and From header
fields in the CANCEL request MUST be identical to those in the request
being cancelled, including tags. ) but it still says Call Leg
Transaction does not exist. ( see ngrep-sip-wip-310.log ).
If I send the CANCEL once the device is ringing, it works fine ( see
sip-trace-good.log ).
If I send the CANCEL after the 100 Trying but before the 180 Ringing (
which is acceptable according to RFC3261 ), the device returns call
leg incorrect.
This looks suspiciously like a bug in the WIP310, but I am not sure.
Can someone please shed some light on my situation?
Thanks,
David
On 2010-06-17 16:59, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users On Jun 17, 2010 at 16:39,
David<kamailio.org(a)spam.lublink.net> wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I had a look at RFC 3261, section 9.1. The trouble is that Kamailio
>is answering "100 Trying" to the caller, so the it is ok for the
>caller to send back a CANCEL request. Trouble is Kamailio forwards
>the request to the called user even though the called user never
>sent a provisional response.
>
>Since the Kamailio server never received a provisional request, it
>is therefore incorrect for it to forward the CANCEL request to the
>called user. ( correct me if I am wrong ).
>
Try 3.0 (kamailio or sip-router). You can control how unreplied branches
are canceled, see
http://sip-router.org/docbook/sip-router/branch/master/modules/tm/tm.html#c…
Andrei
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users