[Serusers] Re: [Serdev] [Patch] Ability to check negative reply code in the failure_route
13 Mar
2005
13 Mar
'05
9:02 p.m.
* Andres <andres(a)telesip.net> [050313 19:15]:
In you reply_route, setflag(10);
and in failure_route(..);
if(is_flag_set(10)){
do_your_stuff();
};
As I said I already have a solution to this. Using
it I can know if a call
did timeout because the gateway is dead, or it did timeout because the
callee didn't answer which is all that I want.
I tested it and it works just fine.
Dan,
Could you please share you ser.cfg trick to solve this issue? I am
trying the "set flag" approach but have not quite nailed it.
Thanks,
--
Andres
Network Admin
http://www.telesip.net
_______________________________________________
Serdev mailing list
serdev(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev
14 Mar
14 Mar
1:37 a.m.
New subject: [Serusers] Re: [Serdev] [Patch] Ability to check negative reply code in the failure_route
Atle Samuelsen wrote:
* Andres <andres(a)telesip.net> [050313 19:15]:
In you reply_route, setflag(10);
and in failure_route(..);
if(is_flag_set(10)){
do_your_stuff();
};
Thanks Atle,
We got it working as expected now.
--
Andres
Network Admin
http://www.telesip.net
As I said
I already have a solution to this. Using it I can know if a call
did timeout because the gateway is dead, or it did timeout because the
callee didn't answer which is all that I want.
I tested it and it works just fine.
Dan,
Could you please share you ser.cfg trick to solve this issue? I am
trying the "set flag" approach but have not quite nailed it.
3:02 a.m.
We got it
working as expected now.
What value is best for fr_timer? I am thinking between 5 to 10 seconds.
Richard
--
Andres
Network Admin
http://www.telesip.net
7:51 a.m.
Atle Samuelsen writes:
i have a question related to this:
In you reply_route, setflag(10);
in order to get to reply route, one must call t_on_reply(x) in a route
block. is there some way to unset t_on_reply in reply_route and thus
prevent further replies getting into there?
if i remember correctly, one must re-call t_on_failure in failure route,
but t_on_reply seems to stick on forever.
-- juha
8:06 a.m.
New subject: [Serusers] Re: [Serdev] [Patch] Ability to check negative replycode in the failure_route
-----Original Message-----
From: serusers-bounces(a)iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On
Behalf Of Juha Heinanen
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 7:52 PM
To: Atle Samuelsen
Cc: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Subject: [Serusers] Re: [Serdev] [Patch] Ability to check negative
replycode in the failure_route
Atle Samuelsen writes:
i have a question related to this:
try t_on_reply("0").
Richard
In you reply_route, setflag(10);
in order to get to reply route, one must call t_on_reply(x) in a route
block. is there some way to unset t_on_reply in reply_route and thus
prevent further replies getting into there?
if i remember correctly, one must re-call t_on_failure in failure route,
but t_on_reply seems to stick on forever.
-- juha
11:24 a.m.
New subject: [Serusers] Open Source SIP Soft phone
Does anybody know of an open Source SIP Soft phone that supports g723 and
works on windows?
Thanks
Deepak Singhal
2:08 p.m.
New subject: [Serusers] Open Source SIP Soft phone
I don't know if this will help, but you can try this link.
http://www.iptel.org/info/products/sipphones.php
Regards,
Paul
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:54:44 +0530, Deepak Singhal
<dsinghal(a)hotwireindia.com> wrote:
Does anybody know of an open Source SIP Soft phone
that supports g723 and
works on windows?
Thanks
Deepak Singhal
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
7224
days inactive
7225
days old
8 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Andres -
Atle Samuelsen -
Deepak Singhal -
Java Rockx -
Juha Heinanen -
Richard