[SR-Users] Wrong onreply_route is called after serial forking

[Klaus Darilion]

Seems like the reply route is a property of the transaction, and not of 
each respective branch. I wouldn't call it "bug" at the moment, but 
would call it a "limitation".

I second Juha's command - as soon as a branch is canceled I do not care 
about any following responses and it may be useful to drop them (to not 
interact with some logic waiting for responses on the new branch) - but 
different users have different scenarios ;-)

regards
Klaus

On 11.10.2012 14:26, Alex Hermann wrote:
> Hello,
>
> i noticed thet in serial forking, replies to earlier branches arriving after
> sending out a new branch use the onreply_route of the later branch instead of
> the onreply_route set before sending the earlier branch....
>
> How to reproduce:
>
> 1) set onreply_route to A
> 2) relay 1st branch
> 3) 1st branch times out, internal 408 is created
> 4) tm send CANCEL to 1st branch
>
> 5) in failure route, onreply_route is set to B
> 6) relay 2nd branch
> 7) 1st branch responds with 487, and goes into reply_route B instead of A
>
> I think each branch should take the reply_route which was set before it got
> relayed and not pick up later changes meant for other branches.
>
> How would i fix this?
>