[Serusers] Why Was This INVITE Not Loose_Route()ed ??

[Klaus Darilion]

Hi all!

Now I'm also confused. As you see from the following CVS commit, 
loose_route should always return 1, whenever record-routing is used. I 
would imply that now every in-dialog request should cause loose_route to 
return 1. But obviously this is not the case because then we wouldn't 
have to discuss here.

regards,
klaus



janakj      2004/11/11 15:45:47 CET

   SER CVS Repository

   Modified files:        (Branch: rel_0_8_14)
     modules/rr           loose.c
   Log:
   - loose_route now returns 1 whenever record-routing is used to route the
     message (backported from HEAD)

   Revision      Changes    Path
   1.26.4.1.2.1  +4 -8      sip_router/modules/rr/loose.c


Cesc Santasusana wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> In a different scenario from yours, i encountered the same problem of
> loose_route() unexpectedly returning false.
> 
> In my case, it was when i was running a softphone on the same computer
> as the ser proxy. If someone would send 
> a routed message to the phone, for example a BYE, or a re-INVITE, SER
> would return false at the loose_route() function. This means that ser
> identifies the previous hop as doing strict routing. 
> 
> I was able to solve this by removing the ser-proxy IP address from the
> alias="...." list in ser.cfg, and then using the domain module to gain
> back the same functionality (or close) when doing the uri==myself. 
> 
> Don't know how your ser.cfg looks like, but just thought that maybe
> this might be useful.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Cesc
> 
> 
> 
>>>>Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at> 03/15/05 11:04AM >>>
> 
> Hi Paul!
> 
> That something I also asked several times and no answer yet. In my 
> experience, loose_route() is true if the request URI contains the "lr"
> 
> paramter (message comes from a strict router). Nevertheless, the 
> loose_route function will remove its own Route: header.
> 
> I solve the troubles by allowing t_relay for all messages with to-tag 
> (in-dialog).
> 
> regards,
> klaus
> 
> 
> Java Rockx wrote:
> Unclassified
> 
>>Hi All.
>>
>>I just don't see why loose_route() returned FALSE for this INVITE
>>message. Can anyone help?
>>
>>This INVITE was sent from my SIP phone to my SER-0.9 proxy. The IPs
>>look funny because our SER proxy sits behind a Cisco 3600 and the
> 
> ALG
> 
>>stuff has rewritten the IPs (ie, the 10.3.0.221 address).
>>
>>Regards,
>>Paul
>>
>>U 2005/03/14 16:01:19.932196 69.200.205.122:5060 -> 10.3.0.221:5060
>>INVITE sip:9195531888 at 66.243.109.99:5060;user=phone SIP/2.0.
>>Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 69.200.205.122:5060;branch=z9hG4bK2434592534.
>>Route: <sip:10.3.0.221;ftag=10000000-0-1811969809;lr>.
>>Route: <sip:216.229.127.60:5060;lr>.
>>From: 3475626630
> 
> <sip:3475626630 at 66.243.109.99:5060;user=phone>;tag=550070175.
> 
>>To:
> 
> <sip:9195531888 at 64.152.60.6;user=phone>;tag=10000000-0-1811969809.
> 
>>Call-ID: 348926-3319820023-453493 at 66.243.109.99.
>>CSeq: 1 INVITE.
>>Contact: <sip:3475626630 at 69.200.205.122:5060>.
>>max-forwards: 70.
>>Allow: INVITE, ACK, OPTIONS, CANCEL, BYE.
>>Content-Type: application/sdp.
>>Content-Length:   171.
>>.
>>v=0.
>>o=- 9528 3044 IN IP4 0.0.0.0.
>>s=-.
>>c=IN IP4 0.0.0.0.
>>t=0 0.
>>m=audio 13456 RTP/AVP 18 101.
>>a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000.
>>a=fmtp:101 0-15.
>>a=sendonly.
>>a=ptime:20.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Serusers mailing list
>>serusers at lists.iptel.org 
>>http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers 
>>
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org 
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> 
>