[Kamailio-Devel] Cseq: 1 INVITE for a 200 canceling ?

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

2009/1/9 Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com>:
> *But the CANCEL comes with the wrong CSeq:
>
> Probabky this kind of message has to be replied with 404 Bad message.

It would require matching the RURI line method against the CSeq
method, so would decrese performance (not too much but...).

I wouldn't implement it. For a CANCEL just the branch should be
matched against current INVITE transactions (or CANCEL transaction if
it's a CANCEL retransmission). Any reason for cheking more data in the
CANCEL request?

If the CANCEL doesn't match a current INVITE transaction (stateless
proxy for example) then it must be processed as any other request, so
an entire request check would be performed, but in case the CANCEL
matches a transaction I don't see benefic on checking it. In fact,
CANCEL is hop by hop, so Kamailio wouldn't forward that CANCEL but
generate a new one.




-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc at aliax.net>