[Serusers] Re: [Serdev] Re: stateful forking?
Cesc
cesc.santa at gmail.com
Thu Apr 19 22:00:00 CEST 2007
Hi Atle!
I knew it had to be sth with append_branch, but all (the few) examples
I looked at had
append_branch with a full sip uri as parameter ... I will try this,
but I am sure this will work :)
Cesc
On 4/19/07, Atle Samuelsen <clona at cyberhouse.no> wrote:
>
> Hi Cesc :)
>
> In this case I think I would write something like :
> if(!message="REGISTER"){record_route()};
>
> if(method=="MESSAGE"){
> t_on_reply("5");
> rewritehostport("SER3");
> append_branch();
> rewritehostport("SER2");
> t_relay();
> }
>
> - atle
>
> * Cesc <cesc.santa at gmail.com> [070419 19:26]:
> > With some ser-ish routing code ... what i do now:
> >
> > if ( MESSAGE ) {
> > t_on_reply("5");
> > rewritehostport( SER3);
> > forward("IP_MCAST_LOC");
> >
> >
> > rewritehostport( SER2 );
> > route( ROUTE_RELAY_DO_TRELAY );
> > break;
> > };
> >
> > On 4/19/07, Cesc <cesc.santa at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >Me = using ser 0.9.6
> > >
> > >It is not very clear for me what I need to do, so bear with me :)
> > >
> > >I have a setup such:
> > >
> > >phone ..... SER1 ........ SER 2
> > > | ................. SER3
> > >So, one ser being frontend of the other 2 ... now, let say that phone
> > >sends MESSAGE msgs, which I want both (ser 2 and 3 ) to receive them.
> > >So, forking, right?
> > >In a previous setup, it sort of work by doing t_newtran() and then
> > >sequentially forward(ser2_ip) and t_forward_nonack(ser3_ip_port) ...
> > >not done by me, the setup, i mean. But eventhough I set t_on_reply()
> > >routes, I don't see the OK/errors msgs when coming back.
> > >Why?
> > >Even better, if I could set a different on_reply for ser2 and for ser3 ...
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >
> > >Cesc
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Serdev mailing list
> > Serdev at lists.iptel.org
> > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev
>
More information about the sr-users
mailing list