[OpenSER-Devel] [ openser-Bugs-1801898 ] route-set bug in presence module

[Will Quan]

In the past I had posted a similar question to sip-implementors. The
explanation was this:

The R-R headers are added to new request to give a chance to crashed
end-points to
re-create state from a mid-dialog request such as re-INVITE to
refresh the call. This is clearer from Section 16.6: Step 4.

"The proxy will remain on the path if it chooses to not insert
a R-R header field value into requests that are already
part of a dialog. However, it would be removed from the path
when an endpoint that has failed reconstitutes the dialog."

Regards,
--will

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.sip-implementors/8974/match=record+route
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3261#section-16.6

Klaus Darilion wrote:
>
>
> Juha Heinanen schrieb:
>
> >  > > If this request is already part of a dialog, the proxy SHOULD
> insert
> >  > > a Record-Route header field value if it wishes to remain on the
> path
> >  > > of future requests in the dialog.  In normal endpoint operation as
> >  > > described in Section 12, these Record- Route header field
> values will
> >  > > not have any effect on the route sets used by the endpoints.
> >  >
> >  > It should insert Record-Route but it has no effect???
> >
> > does not make sense to me and therefore my proxy does not insert r-r
> > header to in-dialog requests.
>
> IMO you are doing it right (my proxies also do not insert RR in
> in-dialog requests).
>
> But for example fwd does insert RR headers. This caused ugly NAT
> problems as eyebeam/xlite < 1.5.16 also was buggy and updated the
> route set if there were Record-Route headers in in-dialog requests.
>
> I fear there are many more buggy clients out there.
>
> regards
> klaus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel