[Serusers] append_branch And New totag Problem

[Greger V. Teigre]

Corey,
I'm not an Asterisk expert, but could you clearify one thing: Does SER 
change the To tag when forwarding to Asterisk or does Asterisk change the To 
tag? It is unclear from your email. I would suspect this problem arises on 
the Asterisk side. Many people have such a setup running, so I'm not sure 
why you have problems. I would expect any GW to get problems if the To tag 
is rewritten.
According to the RFC, you should NOT rewrite To.
g-)

Corey S. McFadden wrote:
> Guys,
>
> We're working with Tekelec to solve a problem we're experiencing with
> one of their SIP gateway cards.  (We're working with a group that
> hadn't heard of SER before we talked to them, so this may or may not
> be correct.)
>
> What happens is this:
> 1. Call originates from SIP PSTN GW (Tekelec unit)
> 2. SER routes call to UA
> 3. UA doesn't answer
> 4. Failure route happens and call is diverted to Asterisk
> 5. Asterisk gets the call but the SIP PSTN GW doesn't ACK the OKs and
>    hangs up.
>
> The scenario works with a variety of UA hardware, so I didn't think
> anything was wrong on our side, but they're saying that on the first
> phase of the call the totag has one ID and then when Asterisk gets
> involved there's a different totag ID.  (This is confirmed w/packet
> captures.)  When the GW card gets the second totag it doesn't match a
> transaction and it is ignored.
>
> So, my question is...  can (and should) we rewrite the totags back to
> the original id?  Can this be done w/textops?  Is this a common
> problem?
>
> Does this make sense?
>
> Thanks for any help,
> -Corey
>
>
>
>
> *********************************************
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> serusers at lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers