Yeah, I'm trying to avoid something complex like keeping state in htable.
I did try it - the docs are correct. drop() on a >= 2xx reply does nothing in a named (TM) onreply_route[].
I really don't care if the transaction is completed internally. I just want to stop the reply going back to the UAC.
So, just wondering if there's some clever alternative idea. If not, I guess I will have to use a global onreply_route and feed it information about whether to use the drop using htable.
On October 21, 2016 5:39:04 AM EDT, Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda@gmail.com wrote:
You can try it, not sure if docs are really in sync there.
On the other hand, could be that the transaction was matching the 2xx and then practically the state of transaction changed to completed, so even doing a drop of not sending out, the transaction is still ended.
An alternative solution is using a hash table with expiration of the items matching the max timeout for transactions.
Cheers, Daniel
On 21/10/16 11:24, Alex Balashov wrote:
The core documentation says that in a named onreply_route[], only provisional replies can be drop()'d. To drop any reply, it is necessary to use a global onreply_route.
Is there any workaround for this, i.e. so I can drop a 2xx reply from a specific TM transaction?
The reason is, to know whether to drop it, I need access to either AVPs or, ideally, dialog variables. Since the global onreply_route is executed by the core, I presume I won't have access to anything that persists through TM there.
Thanks!
-- Alex
-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Advanced Training, Berlin, Oct 24-26, 2016 - http://www.asipto.com
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-- Alex
-- Principal, Evariste Systems LLC (www.evaristesys.com)
Sent from my Google Nexus.