[Serusers] loose_route behaviour, detecting single Route with myself

[Greger Viken Teigre]

This seems like a corner case where the tel uri with no domain results in maybe a bit unfortunate return code from loose_route.
Comments anyone?
g-)


------- Original message -------
From: JF <jfkavaka at gmail.com>
Cc: serusers at iptel.org, openimscore-cscf at lists.berlios.de
Sent: 22.6.'07,  11:11

> Thanks Greger,
> 
> The problem is related to the fact that the Req-URI is a tel-URI.
> I had to work around it in the script by not letting loose_route get
> called when the URI is a tel URI.
> 
> In loose.c, loose_route() says (by looking at the log):
> DBG("loose_route: RURI is NOT myself\n");
> because Req-URI doesn't have a host part.
> 
> Then after_loose(_m, &puri, 1, 0) is called because the single
> existing Route header has our SIP URI.
> And then:
> DBG("after_loose: Topmost route URI: '%.*s' is me\n", uri->len, ZSW(uri->s));
> and
> DBG("after_loose: No next URI found\n");
> An since _ruri_myself == 0, return RR_DRIVEN;
> 
> IMO the fact that the Req-URI is a tel URI shouldn't make loose_route
> return true in this case...
> 
> JF
> 
> 
> On 6/21/07, Greger V. Teigre <greger at teigre.com> wrote:
> > If there's a single Route header pointing to itself, then this is a good
> > indication that a UA added a Route to your proxy as an outbound proxy.
> > If SER correctly identities the uri as itself, it should AFAIK return false.
> > Could you please turn on debugging and then look for loose_route and
> > after_loose debug messages in the logs and post them?
> > g-)
> >
> > JF wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > When SER receives an INVITE with a single Route header pointing to
> > > itself, it's supposed to delete it and process the message as if no
> > > Route header was there in the first place. This is what RFC3261
> > > mandates, right?
> > >
> > > But currently the loose_route function returns true to the script in
> > > this case, just like when more Route headers are present.
> > >
> > > So I have some routing logic for when no Route headers are present,
> > > and if I want to apply the same routing logic to the case when there
> > > is a single Route header pointing to myself (naturally, as it's the
> > > same as if no Route header was present), I currently have to replicate
> > > the same routing logic inside the if (loose_route())...
> > >
> > > Or is there an other way? Do I have to develop my own module function
> > > or use some regexp search from the script to detect if there are more
> > > Routes besides myself before I call loose_route?
> > >
> > > The best would be to change loose_route to return false and just
> > > remove the Route header pointing to myself when there are no more
> > > Route headers in the message... what do you think?
> > >
> > > JF
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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