Hi guys,
is there a way to realize TCP fail over? With UDP, I check for 408s in the failure route and react accordingly. With TCP, the tm modules sends out a 477 without any chance for me to interfere.
Regards.
Hello,
On 11/20/08 16:05, Gawith wrote:
Hi guys,
is there a way to realize TCP fail over? With UDP, I check for 408s in the failure route and react accordingly. With TCP, the tm modules sends out a 477 without any chance for me to interfere.
it is a known issue, put in discussion on devel mailing list, also mentioned in the agenda of last devel meeting.: http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/development:irc-meeting-agenda-06-... It is in my to-do list for the next release - just check devel mailing list archive for more info: http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/devel/
Cheers, Daniel
Daniel-Constantin Mierla schrieb:
Hello,
On 11/20/08 16:05, Gawith wrote:
Hi guys,
is there a way to realize TCP fail over? With UDP, I check for 408s in the failure route and react accordingly. With TCP, the tm modules sends out a 477 without any chance for me to interfere.
it is a known issue, put in discussion on devel mailing list, also mentioned in the agenda of last devel meeting.: http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/development:irc-meeting-agenda-06-... It is in my to-do list for the next release - just check devel mailing list archive for more info: http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/devel/
So, to answer the question - there is no way to handle this smart.
Of course there is the dirty workaround to loop the message through Kamailio to catch the 477.
regards klaus
Thanks guys,
after inspecting the source code I already expected something like that :-(
Cheers
Klaus Darilion schrieb:
Daniel-Constantin Mierla schrieb:
Hello,
On 11/20/08 16:05, Gawith wrote:
Hi guys,
is there a way to realize TCP fail over? With UDP, I check for 408s in the failure route and react accordingly. With TCP, the tm modules sends out a 477 without any chance for me to interfere.
it is a known issue, put in discussion on devel mailing list, also mentioned in the agenda of last devel meeting.: http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/development:irc-meeting-agenda-06-...
It is in my to-do list for the next release - just check devel mailing list archive for more info: http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/devel/
So, to answer the question - there is no way to handle this smart.
Of course there is the dirty workaround to loop the message through Kamailio to catch the 477.
regards klaus
Hello,
On 11/21/08 10:05, Gawith wrote:
Thanks guys,
after inspecting the source code I already expected something like that :-(
there are solutions to go even now, I had the impression you want to do it using failure_route...
Check this: http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/tm.html#id2506624
If t_relay() returns -6 then it is the case of send error, so you can continue after it with something else:
t_relay("0x02");
switch($rc) { case -6: # do your send-failover logic here break; }
Cheers, Daniel
Cheers
Klaus Darilion schrieb:
Daniel-Constantin Mierla schrieb:
Hello,
On 11/20/08 16:05, Gawith wrote:
Hi guys,
is there a way to realize TCP fail over? With UDP, I check for 408s in the failure route and react accordingly. With TCP, the tm modules sends out a 477 without any chance for me to interfere.
it is a known issue, put in discussion on devel mailing list, also mentioned in the agenda of last devel meeting.: http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/development:irc-meeting-agenda-06-...
It is in my to-do list for the next release - just check devel mailing list archive for more info: http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/devel/
So, to answer the question - there is no way to handle this smart.
Of course there is the dirty workaround to loop the message through Kamailio to catch the 477.
regards klaus
Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users