[Serusers] Support for Gateway still on RFC2543

[Klaus Darilion]

Simon Miles wrote:
> Klaus,
> 
> Thanks for the feedback, but I still think it is a problem.
> 
> If I use the prefix command, this effects the URI field but not the To
> field. According to RFC2543 the To field is the one to use for dialling
> when the INVITE gets to it's final destination.

Are you sure that the To: field is used fpr dialing - not the request 
URI? Can you point me to the relevant sections in RFC2543?

regards,
klaus

PS: Please CC to the list.

> 
> Hence the prefix command can't be used ! ! ! If I mangle the To field
> then this effects the Call-ID so the SIP software sees a reply to the
> INVITE as another message ! !
> 
> Simon
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Klaus Darilion [mailto:klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at] 
> Sent: 10 January 2005 22:27
> To: Simon Miles
> Cc: serusers at lists.iptel.org
> Subject: Re: [Serusers] Support for Gateway still on RFC2543
> 
> 
> There should be no problem at all - RFC 3261 is compatible with the old 
> RFC. ser will look for the "lr" parameter in the via headers and will 
> use strict routing if the lr parameter is not found in the topmost via 
> header.
> 
> regards,
> klaus
> 
> Simon Miles wrote:
> 
> 
>>Dear Community,
>> 
>>I still have gateways that confirm to RFC2543 and not the newer 
>>RFC3261. This means the use of URI and To fields are different. Is 
>>there any way of telling sip_router that it needs to conform to the 
>>old spec ?
>> 
>>Thanks
>> 
>> 
>>Simon
>>
>>
>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>--
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Serusers mailing list
>>serusers at lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> 
> 
>