16 Feb
2007
16 Feb
'07
6:53 p.m.
everyday I learn something!!!! :D
I has assumed CANCEL was "magically" processed by tm module.
i'll lookup() CANCEL requests...
Thank you,
samuel.
2007/2/16, Greger V. Teigre <greger(a)teigre.com>om>:
My point was that such CANCEL must hit lookup. If not
ser has no way of
knowing where to route it (as there are no Route headers).
Obviously t_relay will lookup the ruri using dns, resolve it to your ser
and then you get into a loop.
g-)
samuel wrote:
i'm pretty sure CANCEL hits t_relay and
should be matched agains
INVITE transaction...the only main routing difference between CANCEL
and INVITE is NAT stuff and lookupXXXX which I think it does not
affect this thread's topic, or did i miss something??
Try to dial a number and immediately hang up...don't you see the Too
Many Hops?
Samuel.
2007/2/16, samuel <samu60(a)gmail.com>om>:
mmm
i'll take a look at the config...
maybe i just had a wrong config after all...if that's the case,
apologies for the false "race condition" :P
samuel.
2007/2/16, Greger V. Teigre <greger(a)teigre.com>om>:
It may be that you are not handling the CANCEL correctly. An early
CANCEL
(no Route headers) will have to be routed as an
INVITE.
g-)
Abdul Qadir wrote:
Hi,
>I think ser should remember canceled transactions and send CANCEL in
>case of delayed provisional replies.
At present I don't think its working like this, As soon as CANCEL
hit SER
an immediate too many hops is returned to sender
and call
continues....resulting in ghost call, where A party has dropped after
sending cancel and B still carries on as no cancel was sent to B.
Best Regards,
Abdul Qadir
Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:
Abdul Qadir wrote:
> Hi ,
>
> I tried to call from one nokia sip (E61 and other models )phone to
another nokia sip phone. The call works fine. The problem comes
only when I
call from Phone A to Phone B and then immediately
cancel the
call(from Phone
A). The Phone A will hangup the call as it sent
CANCEL but the SER
will
ignore this CANCEL and still send INVITE to Phone
B resulting in a
ghost
call situation.
>
Hi!
I think ser should remember canceled transactions and send CANCEL in
case of delayed provisional replies.
regards
klasu
> I tried to capture a log of message and found that Phone A "CANCEL"
message is received on SER even before any provisional response
from Phone
B. Therefor SER doesnot relay this CANCEL request
to Phone B. I
even checked
RFC which clearly says that UAC should not send
CANCEL untill it
receives
any provisional response. I talked to Nokia
expert and they said
the 100
Trying message from your server is considered as
provisional response,
therefor behaviour of client is absolutely correct.
>
> Is there any way I can stop 100 Trying message and still run
statefull
SER, so that I can verify what nokia said. Any
ideas suggestions are
welcome.
>
> Thanking you all in advance.
>
> Best Regards,
> Abdul Qadir
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and
> always stay connected to friends.
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--
Klaus Darilion
nic.at
________________________________
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
________________________________
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers