Hi, To be accurate the next hop after kamailio is a session border controller and not an end-point. And the SBC is the one which get confused with the ACT received from kamailio. Is sys_branch=0 shoudl be used within WITHINDLG block? Thanks, AS Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 14:56:22 +0100 From: miconda(a)gmail.com To: sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org CC: alex_solt(a)hotmail.com Subject: Re: [SR-Users] "branch" tag in the "Via" header of the ACK message for the re-INVITE Hello, try with global parameter: syn_branch=0 An end-to-end ACK is a separate transaction, as it can go directly from caller to callee or skip some hops from the INVITE path (if no record routing is used). So branch in Via should not be used to match the dialog, but call-id, from-tag and to-tag. It would be also good ask the vendor to support properly sip rfc, other sip UAs may not have this configuration option. Cheers, Daniel On 11/9/12 2:49 PM, Alex Solt wrote: Hi, We have a problem with the "branch" tag in the "Via" header of the ACK message for the re-INVITE. The "branch" tag value is not a unique number so the end point thinks the ACK is belong to the previous call. This causes the active calls fail after 15 min (right after the ACK message for re-INVITE passed by kamailio proxy). Is there a way to set the "branch" tag in the "Via" header of the ACK message for the re-INVITE to be a unique number? PS1: We are running kamailio v3.3. PS2: we did not have this issue with the old version of openser. Thanks, AS _______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Advanced Training, Berlin, Nov 5-8, 2012 - http://asipto.com/u/kat Kamailio Advanced Training, Miami, USA, Nov 12-14, 2012 - http://asipto.com/u/katu