Hello,

did the INVITE get to creating a transaction (e.g., was t_relay()/t_newtran() used for it)?

Cheers, Daniel

On 25/07/16 16:37, Ali Soltani wrote:

Hi,

We tested the following on Kamailio 3.x and 4.x and observed the same behavior.

INVITE and CANCEL are sent to Kamailo from the same source within the same transaction. (branch value in the first via header are the same in both INVITE and CANCEL message. Also FROM and TO header are same as well).

However, Kamailio does not relay CANCEL message. UAC keep sending CANCEL till timeout. Apparently, t_check_trans() returns false.

Can anyone help me on this issue on why Kamailio does not relay CANCEL message?

Thanks,

AS

INVITE received by Kamailio

INVITE sip:1111111@10.10.10.10:5060;user=phone SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 20.20.20.20:5060;branch=z9hG4bKkjhg4n100gagvkoup741.1 Max-Forwards: 69 From: sip:2222222@20.20.20.20;tag=SDl9eu701-1c1026774897 To: sip:1111111@10.10.10.10;user=phone Call-ID: SDl9eu701-36d75c874d3f463f6c83c5c94cc98b77-8q7ug02 CSeq: 1 INVITE Contact: sip:2222222@20.20.20.20:5060;transport=udp Supported: em,timer,replaces,path,resource-priority,sdp-anat Allow: REGISTER,OPTIONS,INVITE,ACK,CANCEL,BYE,NOTIFY,PRACK,REFER,INFO,SUBSCRIBE,UPDATE User-Agent: CS-CustomerName/v.6.60A.274 Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: 237 P-Asserted-Identity: tel:2222222 P-Asserted-Identity: sip:2222222@192.168.0.1

after 70 msec CANCEL received by Kamailio in the same transaction

CANCEL sip:1111111@10.10.10.10:5060;user=phone SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 20.20.20.20:5060;branch=z9hG4bKkjhg4n100gagvkoup741.1 CSeq: 1 CANCEL Max-Forwards: 69 From: sip:2222222@20.20.20.20;tag=SDl9eu701-1c1026774897 To: sip:1111111@10.10.10.10.;user=phone Call-ID: SDl9eu701-36d75c874d3f463f6c83c5c94cc98b77-8q7ug02 Content-Length: 0 Reason: Q.850 ;cause=16

---

SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users