[Serusers] RE: Serusers Digest, Vol 8, Issue 16

[Jiri Kuthan]

SER does not generate such an error, SEMS does. Possibly,
your BYEs are mistakenly passed to SEMS. They are supposed
to be processed by loose routing.

-jiri

At 08:33 PM 12/18/2003, Darren Sessions wrote:
>Situation:
>
>Endpoint is called Party (Sipura SPA2000)
>
>Calling Party is routed through from a TDM call and VoIP'd by Cisco 3640
>router then sent to SER.
>
>Endpoint receives call - everything works. When the Sipura hangs up the
>call, it sends a BYE to ser - but ser does not send the BYE to the router to
>disconnect the TDM channel.
>
>All other situations result in a completed call with channels released on
>the router just fine.
>
>After further inspection - we noticed that when the Sipura hangs up and send
>the BYE to SER, SER responds with this:
>
>
>SIP/2.0 481 Call/Transaction Does Not Exist
>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 11.11.111.155:5060;branch=z9hG4bK-b76fe29f
>From: <sip:8646783182 at 22.22.222.154>;tag=bc5a80577e3d5642
>To: <sip:8644679887 at 33.33.333.157>;tag=322BCA98-25A3
>Call-ID: F429FDCE-30B011D8-BA0EDB9C-52307829 at 33.33.333.157
>CSeq: 101 BYE
>Contact: <sip:8644679887 at 44.44.444.148>
>Server: Sip EXpress router (0.8.12 (i386/linux))
>Content-Length: 0
>Warning: 392 44.44.444.148:5060 "Noisy feedback tells:  pid=20033
>req_src_ip=22.22.222.154 req_src_port=5060
>in_uri=sip:8644679887 at 44.44.444.148:5060
>out_uri=sip:8644679887 at 44.44.444.148:5060 via_cnt==0"
>
>
>Any ideas?
>
>Thanks,
>
> - Darren
>
>_______________________________________________
>Serusers mailing list
>serusers at lists.iptel.org
>http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

--
Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/