[SR-Users] use append_hf() and remove_hf() on the same message

Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda at gmail.com
Wed Nov 6 12:48:47 CET 2013


On 11/5/13 4:49 PM, Camille Oudot wrote:
> Le Tue, 5 Nov 2013 14:53:34 +0100,
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com> a écrit :
>> Even if the header is not present, insert/append_hf() should not fail
> Ok I assumed wrong. The issue looks trickier: I've made tests that go
> OK or KO depending on a harmless looking cfg change. In the KO
> situation, a Path header is set depending on a !ifdef directive + if
> condition, while in the OK case, it's inserted without condition.
> After the Path hdr insertion, three other headers are appended.
> In the KO log, on line 3508, there are only three append_hf while in
> the OK log, there are four (line 3408).
> The network traces show that the Require header is not inserted as
> requested in the cfg.
> Update: adding a dummy xlog line on line 22 of kamailio.ko.cfg makes it
> work: the Require header is inserted but the log line is not printed.
What defines you set for each of the cases? I see there is an else left 
open inside the #!ifdef, which ends up in getting an append_hf() if the 
define id is set.


Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio Advanced Trainings - Berlin, Nov 25-28
   - more details about Kamailio trainings at http://www.asipto.com -

More information about the sr-users mailing list