At 16:35
25/04/2007, tzieleniewski wrote:
Hi,
I am using SER rel 2_0_0 from CVS.
I encountered the following situation.
My scenario was the following:
UA -> Application Serwer -> SER -> UA
1. UA sent an INVITE message to the application server.
2. Application Server changed the Request URI and forwarded statelessly the INVITE message
to SER.
3. Everything would be ok but SER replied to the Application server instead of the client.
It can be that you meant to say something different, but that's standard
SIP behqviour that you send a reply to the most immediate upstream
entity (AS in this case).
Application server changed only the Request URI
and nothing else.
Shouldn't SER sent the response according to the VIA header value??
You mean to say that the AS didn't add its own Via in there?
Yes, the aim was to apply some external to SER modifications on the SIP massage
and then return it back to SER. It was suppose to be something like invocation of some
external logic outside the SIP routing procedures.