[Users] Route-header DNS lookup?

[Simon Morvan]

As Daniel said on the ml thread :
> it makes sense, we will analyze the implications and include it on the
> to-do list.
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
Has it been included in the developpement branch yet ?

-- 
Simon.

2006/7/7, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at>:
> I'm not sure about the maddr parameter. doesn't it mean that the request
> should be forwarded to this IP regardsless of the domain? If yes, the
> DNS lookup can be skipped.
>
> regards
> klaus
>
> Kerker Staffan wrote:
> > hi
> > i recently bounced into this problem, and i'm not sure here.
> > i'm running the openser-devel, with the cacheless db_mode=3. (works fine btw)
> >
> > the record-route header received by the proxy on the other side (SNOM4S), inserts
> > the domain name (iptel1.ipatl.se) and not the hostname (sip.iptel1.ipatl.se) in the
> > record-route header, and uses the maddr=<ip_of_server> with the actual server IP address.
> >
> > now, when my client (behind the OpenSER) replies with an ACK to the incomming OK,
> > it uses the Route-header recieved in the RR-header, and sends the ACK to OpenSER. i
> > then get the following errors in OpenSER.
> >
> > ---
> > /usr/local/sbin/openser[3583]: ERROR: mk_proxy: could not resolve hostname: "iptel1.ipatl.se"
> > /usr/local/sbin/openser[3583]: ERROR: uri2proxy: bad host name in URI <sip:4ffec4ce755c218a72228c6643cb3b6b at iptel1.ipatl.se:5060;maddr=172.28.248.66;transport=udp;lr>
> > ---
> >
> > the ACK i sent look like this:
> >
> > ---
> > Request-Line: ACK sip:2307 at iptel1.ipatl.se;gruu=6fg9n6dl SIP/2.0
> >       Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 172.28.248.52:2051;branch=z9hG4bK-d96b1fvapkyn;rport
> >       Route: <sip:172.28.248.10;lr=on;ftag=li9buf1i4p>
> >       Route: <sip:4ffec4ce755c218a72228c6643cb3b6b at iptel1.ipatl.se:5060;maddr=                172.28.248.66;transport=udp;lr>
> >       From: "Snom 2652" <sip:2652 at ipatl.se>;tag=li9buf1i4p
> >       To: <sip:2307 at ipatl.se>;tag=hvseiz7kgb
> >       Call-ID: 3c269d83900b-xj3ild14y880 at snom360
> >       CSeq: 1 ACK
> >       Max-Forwards: 70
> >       Contact: <sip:2652 at 172.28.248.52:2051;line=cp4a7ljd>
> >       Content-Length: 0
> > ---
> >
> > as far as i understand, according the rfc 3263, the route-header may contain domain name that
> > has to be resolved using SRV.
> >
> > ---
> > "6 Constructing SIP URIs
> >
> >    In many cases, an element needs to construct a SIP URI for inclusion
> >    in a Contact header in a REGISTER, or in a Record-Route header in an
> >    INVITE.  According to RFC 3261 [1], these URIs have to have the
> >    property that they resolve to the specific element that inserted
> >    them.  However, if they are constructed with just an IP address, for
> >    example:
> >
> >    sip:1.2.3.4
> >
> >    then should the element fail, there is no way to route the request or
> >    response through a backup.
> >
> >    SRV provides a way to fix this.  Instead of using an IP address, a
> >    domain name that resolves to an SRV record can be used:
> >
> >    sip:server23.provider.com"
> > ---
> >
> > now, OpenSER only asks DNS for an A record of the name recieved in the route header,
> > and since that's a domain name, it's unresolvable, and so the ACK is never sent.
> >
> > any hints or clues?
> >
> > best regards,
> > /Staffan Kerker
> >
> >
> > --
> > Staffan Kerker
> > Saab Communications, Växjö
> > p. +46 470 42185
> > c. +46 705 391365
> > m. staffan.kerker at saabgroup.com
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Users mailing list
> > Users at openser.org
> > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>