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@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@openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users