[Serusers] SER Nokia CANCEL Problem

[samuel]

everyday I learn something!!!! :D
I has assumed CANCEL was "magically" processed by tm module.
i'll lookup() CANCEL requests...

Thank you,
samuel.

2007/2/16, Greger V. Teigre <greger at teigre.com>:
> My point was that such CANCEL must hit lookup. If not ser has no way of
> knowing where to route it (as there are no Route headers).
> Obviously t_relay will lookup the ruri using dns, resolve it to your ser
> and then you get into a loop.
> g-)
>
> samuel wrote:
> > i'm pretty sure CANCEL hits t_relay and should be matched agains
> > INVITE transaction...the only main routing difference between CANCEL
> > and INVITE is NAT stuff and lookupXXXX which I think it does not
> > affect this thread's topic, or did i miss something??
> >
> > Try to dial a number and immediately hang up...don't you see the Too
> > Many Hops?
> >
> > Samuel.
> >
> > 2007/2/16, samuel <samu60 at gmail.com>:
> >> mmm
> >>
> >> i'll take a look at the config...
> >>
> >> maybe i just had a wrong config after all...if that's the case,
> >> apologies for the false "race condition" :P
> >> samuel.
> >>
> >> 2007/2/16, Greger V. Teigre <greger at teigre.com>:
> >> >
> >> >  It may be that you are not handling the CANCEL correctly. An early
> >> CANCEL
> >> > (no Route headers) will have to be routed as an INVITE.
> >> >  g-)
> >> >
> >> >  Abdul Qadir wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> >  >I think ser should remember canceled transactions and send CANCEL in
> >> >  >case of delayed provisional replies.
> >> >
> >> >  At present I don't think its working like this, As soon as CANCEL
> >> hit SER
> >> > an immediate too many hops is returned to sender and call
> >> > continues....resulting in ghost call, where A party has dropped after
> >> > sending cancel and B still carries on as no cancel was sent to B.
> >> >
> >> >  Best Regards,
> >> >  Abdul Qadir
> >> >
> >> >  Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at> wrote:
> >> >  Abdul Qadir wrote:
> >> >  > Hi ,
> >> >  >
> >> >  > I tried to call from one nokia sip (E61 and other models )phone to
> >> > another nokia sip phone. The call works fine. The problem comes
> >> only when I
> >> > call from Phone A to Phone B and then immediately cancel the
> >> call(from Phone
> >> > A). The Phone A will hangup the call as it sent CANCEL but the SER
> >> will
> >> > ignore this CANCEL and still send INVITE to Phone B resulting in a
> >> ghost
> >> > call situation.
> >> >  >
> >> >
> >> >  Hi!
> >> >
> >> >  I think ser should remember canceled transactions and send CANCEL in
> >> >  case of delayed provisional replies.
> >> >
> >> >  regards
> >> >  klasu
> >> >
> >> >  > I tried to capture a log of message and found that Phone A "CANCEL"
> >> > message is received on SER even before any provisional response
> >> from Phone
> >> > B. Therefor SER doesnot relay this CANCEL request to Phone B. I
> >> even checked
> >> > RFC which clearly says that UAC should not send CANCEL untill it
> >> receives
> >> > any provisional response. I talked to Nokia expert and they said
> >> the 100
> >> > Trying message from your server is considered as provisional response,
> >> > therefor behaviour of client is absolutely correct.
> >> >  >
> >> >  > Is there any way I can stop 100 Trying message and still run
> >> statefull
> >> > SER, so that I can verify what nokia said. Any ideas suggestions are
> >> > welcome.
> >> >  >
> >> >  > Thanking you all in advance.
> >> >  >
> >> >  > Best Regards,
> >> >  > Abdul Qadir
> >> >  >
> >> >  >
> >> >  > ---------------------------------
> >> >  > Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and
> >> >  > always stay connected to friends.
> >> >  >
> >> >  >
> >> >  >
> >> >
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >  >
> >> >  > _______________________________________________
> >> >  > Serusers mailing list
> >> >  > Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> >> >  > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >  --
> >> >  Klaus Darilion
> >> >  nic.at
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >  ________________________________
> >> > Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
> >> >  in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
> >> ________________________________
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > 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
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>