Hi Mark!
I do not know it exactly, but I think the important thing is the contact
header URI of the INVITE. Does it contain a transport=tcp parameter?
Otherwise, ser is correct when using UDP.
klaus
Mark Aiken wrote:
Hi,
I'm having problems getting SER to (loose) route requests from UDP to
TCP. I'm not sure if the UA is at fault here or some SER config issue.
SER receives an INVITE over TCP, record_route() is called and then the
request is relayed via UDP (t_relay_to_udp) to the UA. The
INVITE relayed to the UDP UA now has 2 Record-Route headers added by
SER. One has the transport=tcp parameter.
Record-Route: <sip:xx.xx.xx.xx;r2=on;ftag=xyz;lr=on>
Record-Route: <sip:xx.xx.xx.xx;transport=tcp;r2=on;ftag=xyz>
When the UA sends the BYE to SER, it has the 2 Route headers like so (on
a single line):
Route:
<sip:xx.xx.xx.xx;r2=on;ftag=xyz;lr=on>,<sip:xx.xx.xx.xx;transport=tcp;r2=on;ftag=xyz;lr=on>
The SER script simply calls t_relay() in the loose_route section of the
script.
I expected t_relay() to relay the BYE via TCP, since the Route header
has transport=tcp, but it sends the BYE via UDP instead.
Anyone seen this problem before? Do I need to check for transport=tcp
and call t_relay_to_tcp, rather than using t_relay after loose_route()?
Mark
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers