So if I wont use the drop reply I might get what I need? בתאריך 7 בנוב 2012 18:10, מאת "Klaus Darilion" <klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at
:
Ingoring accounting, such "sequential forking" scenarios are usually solved by having the forkin logic in a failure-route.
- 1st callee sends 486
- failure route is executed, if winning response is 486, set the new
destination and t_relay().
I do not know how this single transaction with 2 branches is reflected in the acc table, but I guess you can implement any acc behavior using manual accounting.
regards Klaus
On 07.11.2012 16:29, Uri Shacked wrote:
To be more accurate - I am using the "t_set_fr()" it generates 408 and sends cancel to the destination.
This is the case that i do not see a final reply for the first invite.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Uri Shacked <ushacked@gmail.com mailto:ushacked@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, I am trying to make an option of "route when no answer" or " route when busy". What I am doing is checking the reply and if "busy", for example, I use "t_drop_replies". Then, I set the new number and route[relay]again. On the accdb table, I get the first invite with 183 and after that the second invite with 183 and with 200. I would like to do exactly what i do, but would like to see on the accdb the 486 reply from the first invite. how do i do it? BR, Uri
______________________________**_________________ 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-**usershttp://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users