[Serusers] SER is not matching ACK Messages

[Jiri Kuthan]

At 04:49 PM 5/26/2003, Ricardo Villa wrote:
>Hi Jiri,
>
>Could you explain how to "use RFC-3261 transaction matching".  Is this
>something I can switch on in the ser.cfg?

SER supports both -- it is about ATAs doing it correctly. The RFC3261
transaction matching is simple and good -- it uses explicit transaction
identifier (Via/branch parameter). Previously, transaction identifier
was calculated from a bunch of message elements, which was simply broken.

-Jiri


>Thanks,
>Ricardo
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jiri Kuthan" <jiri at iptel.org>
>To: <serusers at lists.iptel.org>; "Ricardo Villa" <ricvil at epm.net.co>;
><aolchik at telenova.net>
>Cc: "List serusers" <serusers at lists.iptel.org>
>Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 7:53 PM
>Subject: Re: [Serusers] SER is not matching ACK Messages
>
>
>> At 11:57 PM 5/25/2003, Nils Ohlmeier wrote:
>> >Ok i first overlooked a problem in the messages.
>> >I think the ATA is guilty because the request URI of the ACK is not the
>same
>> >as the URI from the INVITE. And if i'm not wrong the URIs has to be the
>same
>> >because the ACK for a negative reply belongs to the transaction.
>>
>> Thanks Nils -- indeed, that's an ATA bug -- the URIs must be the same.
>>
>> To fix the problem, I urge ATA users to urge Cisco. You can use some
>workarounds
>> (like disabling tm "ruri_matching" tm parameter in the about to be
>released
>> ser 0.8.11 version) but ATA is the primary place to fix. Actually, the
>best
>> thing to do with ATA is to use RFC-3261 transaction matching -- 2541
>matching
>> has been obsoleted quite a while ago.
>>
>> -jiri
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Serusers mailing list
>> serusers at lists.iptel.org
>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>

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