[SR-Users] tm module question

Prelle, Stefan Stefan.Prelle at qsc.de
Fri Jan 14 17:23:59 CET 2011

Hi Klaus,

thank you for your prompt reply. Yes, that is exactly what I was looking for.
I wonder why I did not notice the parameter myself.


-----Original Message-----
From: Klaus Darilion [mailto:klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at] 
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2011 4:58 PM
To: Prelle, Stefan
Cc: sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] tm module question

Am 14.01.2011 16:52, schrieb Prelle, Stefan:
> Hi folks,
> I have a problem with a scenario where an incoming INVITE is forwarded 
> to a redirect server which responds with 302 and a new target in the 
> Contact header (B). The call is being forwarded to the new contact 
> correctly. All responses from B that are either provisional or a 200 
> OK are being routed back to the caller. If B responds with any code>=400 the 302 from the redirect server is being returned to the caller instead of the received code.
> A          B          C
> |--INVITE->|          |
> |          |--INVITE->|
> |          |<---302---|   D
> |          |----INVITE--->|
> |          |<-----404-----|
> |<---302---|
> Is this intended? And if so, is there any way to change this behaviour 
> so the latest received response is returned?

Yes - it is intended. The lowest response code of all branches will used (RFC conform).

You can change this behavior by either (I think b is what you look for).

a) load another failure route in the existing failure route. in the new failure route use t_reply() to set a proper failure route

b) play around with tm module parameters, especially failure_reply_mode():


More information about the sr-users mailing list