[SR-Users] BUG? - Dialog module timeout BYE is not ok.

[Uri Shacked]

Yes, i meant the FROM and TO.
I think in version 3.2.0 the headers had theses < >....
So, even if the user agents (vendors stacks) are at fault.... how can i
deal with it?
any ideas?

>You probably meant the To and From headers, I'm guessing.
>
>Yeah, as long as there is no display name component, URIs in headers like
that don't have to go in <>s. The way >Kamailio sends it is grammatically
valid, per RFC 3261. The user agents are at fault for not understanding it
correctly.
>
>
>Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>>
wrote:
>
>*"BYE headers"? Which headers? *>* *>*Uri Shacked <ushacked at gmail.com<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>>
wrote: *>* *>>*Hi, *>>* *>>*I think there is a bug with the BYE that is
sent to the caller and *>>*callee *>>*when dialog timeout happends. *>>* *>>
*The BYE headers are sent with no "<" or ">". *>>*So, some sip singaling
points decline the BYE. *>>* *>>*BR, *>>*Uri *


On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Uri Shacked <ushacked at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think there is a bug with the BYE that is sent to the caller and callee
> when dialog timeout happends.
>
> The BYE headers are sent with no "<" or ">".
> So, some sip singaling points decline the BYE.
>
> BR,
> Uri
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20130423/e048321b/attachment-0001.html>