[Serusers] append_hf before sl_send_reply?

Ulrich Abend ullstar at iptel.org
Thu Jan 22 09:31:11 CET 2004


Hi,

could someone please give a statement on this:

If you use append_hf before a sl_send_reply (code 302), the appended HF is not 
included in the message. Is this behaviour intented or is it a bug?

Thanks,

Uli.

----------  Forwarded Message  ----------

Subject: Re: Sorry to bother you
Date: Wednesday 21 January 2004 16:47
From: Marcello Lupo <lupo at itspecialist.it>
To: Ulrich Abend <ullstar at iptel.org>

Hio Ulrich,
thank you for the answer.
YEs you get the problem.

For the original header field i was making a mistake, it only do not append
addedd field (CC-Diversion) in this case.

This is the answer of the SER with the  Moved Temporarly:

***********************************************+

U 194.244.164.13:5060 -> 194.244.164.14:5060
  SIP/2.0 302 Moved Temporarily..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP  194.244.164.14:5060..From:
"anonymous" <sip:194.244.164.14>;tag=9B2BDCC
  8-1BD2..To:
<sip:0350545048 at 194.244.164.13>;tag=da45cd22c5a2c167d6e0afbf7b99da4a.4b46..Ca
ll-ID: 62E20996-453F11D6-9D4FFB
  9A-B058E7F8 at 194.244.164.14..CSeq: 101 INVITE..Contact:
sip:390457156862 at 194.244.164.14:5060..Server: Sip EXpress router
  (0.8.11 (i386/linux))..Content-Length: 0..Warning: 392 194.244.164.13:5060
"Noisy feedback tells:  pid=27841 req_src_ip=
  194.244.164.14 req_src_port=50410 in_uri=sip:0350545048 at 194.244.164.13:5060
out_uri=sip:390457156862 at 194.244.164.14:5060
   via_cnt==1"....
*************************************************

YEs the CC-Diversion field is not appended even if i specify it in the
configuration with append_urihf or append_hf .
I uset this command syntax:

append_hf("CC-Diversion:<sip:0350545048 at 390350545001.lea-d.net:5060>;reason=u
nconditional\r\n");

When i use it in a new call it is appended, but with the sl_send_reply it is
not.

Thanks,
Bye,
MArcello

On Wednesday 21 January 2004 16:09, you wrote:
> Hi Marcello,
>
> On Tuesday 20 January 2004 22:13, Marcello Lupo wrote:
> > Hi Ulrich,
> > i hope you remember me... Marcello from Italy.
>
> Of course, I remember ;-)
>
> > today i wrote an e-mail on the mailing list but don't received any
> > answer.
>
> You will receive an answer for shure, but sometimes it may take a little.
>
> A short look into the sources showed me, that the sl_send_reply function
> _should_ include the original header fields for any code between 300 and
> 400. From your mail I understand it does not, right?
>
> From your mail in serusers I understand that you only have the problem
> left, that the CC-diversion field is not present, even if you specify
> append-HF in the script?
>
> If that is the problem, you probably have to add the required functionality
> in the sl module. Maybe this is also a bug. (~ line 175 in
> modules/sl/sl_funcs.c)
>
> Please send your problem again, if I misunderstood you, I will take a
> closer look at it tomorrow.
>
> Uli.
>
> > I'm crushing my head to find out a way to let SER to answer to a call
> > with a 302 Moved temporarly and the request appended to it with the
> > addendum of the CC-Diversion field so our gateway (cisco 3725) can
> > correctly take the CC-Diversion field and put the number in the
> > Redirecting Number in the ISDN setup.
> > I tried to do it on a normal call but seems that the cisco ignore teh
> > CC-DIversion field.
> > From the documentatio i read it take in consideration the CC-Diversion
> > only if it receive a 3xx answer.
> > I tried to use the sl_send_reply function but it answer to cisco without
> > appending the original request and any field i specify with append_hf or
> > append_urihf.
> > Can you help me?
> > Thanks a lot,
> > Bye,
> > MArcello

-------------------------------------------------------




More information about the sr-users mailing list