[Devel] [ openser-Bugs-1491017 ] LCR problem if no user-part in R-URI

[Klaus Darilion]

I also vote for option 2.

regards
klaus

SourceForge.net wrote:
> Bugs item #1491017, was opened at 2006-05-18 17:14
> Message generated for change (Comment added) made by agranig
> You can respond by visiting: 
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=743020&aid=1491017&group_id=139143
> 
> Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
> including the initial issue submission, for this request,
> not just the latest update.
> Category: modules
> Group: ver devel
> Status: Open
> Resolution: None
> Priority: 5
> Submitted By: Andreas Granig (agranig)
> Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
> Summary: LCR problem if no user-part in R-URI
> 
> Initial Comment:
> next_gw() always prefixes the rewritten host-part with
> an '@' sign, which breaks requests not containing a
> user-part (like REGISTER).
> 
> Thus for example the R-URI sip:some.host.com is
> rewritten to sip:@127.0.0.1:5080, resulting in an error
> when relaying.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>> Comment By: Andreas Granig (agranig)
> Date: 2006-05-26 10:12
> 
> Message:
> Logged In: YES 
> user_id=825350
> 
> The attached patch fixes the problem according to suggestion #2.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Comment By: Bogdan (bogdan_iancu)
> Date: 2006-05-26 10:02
> 
> Message:
> Logged In: YES 
> user_id=1275325
> 
> any consent on the topic? In both situations we need to fix
> the code; as it is now, the output is a bogus RURI.
> 
> 1) if the code is not supposed to accept RURI without
> username, the module must generate er if no username found.
> 
> 2) if it should accept RURI without username, '@' is to be
> added only if username is present.
> 
> My personal opinion is to go for fix number 2:  even if this
> scenario wasn't included in the original specs of the
> module, I see no reason not to enlarge the module's
> applicability, especially when is about some small fix and
> no other thinks are broken or altered.
> 
> regards,
> bogdan 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Comment By: Andreas Granig (agranig)
> Date: 2006-05-19 10:18
> 
> Message:
> Logged In: YES 
> user_id=825350
> 
> I don't think it's a good idea to restrict the usage of the
> module "by design". People use it for load-balancing
> requests to different kind of UAs, not only PSTN gateways,
> and this may  require also the proper routing of requests
> without a user-part.
> 
> Attached you can find a patch. It's just a minor tweak to
> fix this issue.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
> Date: 2006-05-18 22:28
> 
> Message:
> Logged In: NO 
> 
> next_gw() function has been designed to handle dialog
> initiating requests bound to pstn gateways.  register
> request is not such a request.  i cannot imagine, how pstn
> gateway could handle an intial request, whose destination is
> not a telephone number.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> You can respond by visiting: 
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=743020&aid=1491017&group_id=139143
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel