[SR-Users] bflag mystery

[Seudin Kasumovic]

Please don't!

It's usefully to have NAT flag in usrloc if you need in script handle SDP.
Also, once used flag (bit) can't be re-used anywhere else.

Seudin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Juha Heinanen <jh at tutpro.com> wrote:

> Juha Heinanen writes:
>
> > however, when i look what gets stores in location table, cflags column
> > of the contact has value 384.  it is also shown by ul_dump:
> >
> > Cflag:: 384
> >
> > 384 = 256 + 128.  i must be missing something trivial. how is it
> > possible that also flag 7 (which is my nat_bflag) gets set in usrloc?
>
> i think i found the answer. in save.c:
>
>                 /* get received */
>                 if (path_received.len && path_received.s) {
>                         ci.cflags |= ul.nat_flag;
>                         ci.received = path_received;
>                 }
>
> if i understood the above correctly, existence of received param in path
> header of register request, automatically sets nat bflag that (in my
> case 7). where is that documented?
>
> anyway, it makes no sense at all to me.  if p2 gets register request
> from another proxy p1, which received it from ua and included the path
> header, it is responsibility of p1 to handle possible nat pinging.  p2
> should not have anything to do with it.
>
> can i fix this bug, i.e., remove line
>
> ci.cflags |= ul.nat_flag;
>
> from the above?
>
> -- juha
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>



-- 
MSC Seudin Kasumovic
Tuzla, Bosnia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20130423/e36583d4/attachment.html>