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-users