25 Jul
2007
25 Jul
'07
8:09 a.m.
Hey Klaus,
It was solved by commenting the fix_nated_contact() in my route section
that deals with NAT. In that section, if was found that NAT is required then
it does:
force_rport();
fix_nated_contact(); // which is not commented
are there any side-effects to doing this?
Regards,
Lir.
On 7/24/07, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:
I suspect you are using fix_nated_contact twice. Use it only in route[],
but not in failure_route[]
klaus
liran tal wrote:
Hey everyone,
I'm using sequential forking and on one of the scenarios there appears
to be a problem.
When OpenSER attempts to find the first most relevant destination for
the
call the SIP headers are ok. If the first
destination that OpenSER
attempts
to contact is offline/unreachable it continues to
the next one in turn
in
which
it produces a bad Contact header which looks like this:
Contact: <sip:101@192.168.0.1:5060sip:101@192.168.0.1:5060>
As you can see it's writing the sip information twice for some reason.
Has anyone seen this happen before?
Also, where should I be looking at to find the problem?
Thanks,
Lir.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users