See inline ...
On 11/24/05, Greger V. Teigre greger@teigre.com wrote:
Cesc, I've tried to find some meaning in what you sent, but I don't really know the details of the ACK hack (pun not intended) Jan mentioned. To me it looks like the ACK is absorbed correctly.
In the logs provided, the acks are not absorbed at all (well, yes, due to a hack in my config file ... but otherwise not).
However, the REGISTER messages confuses me a bit. Also, you don't record_route CANCELs and ACKs, why?
I don't know :) So far it worked fine. Do you think that record-routing the ACKs may solve this problem? ( See the following paragraph for a strange development )
Also, we checked yesterday and ... surprise! :) We discovered this "feature" after upgrading from ser_0.9.0 to ser_0.9.4 ... we still have some pcs with ser_0.9.0 (ser.cfg and sems are the same overall), and they don't show this behavior (OK/ACK being resent for a while). This only happens in the newer setups with ser_0.9.4
Cesc