[SR-Users] Registrar path support on lookup

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

You should put the config somewhere for review. Note that default
kamailio.cfg ignores Route headers for initial requests. You have to
handle initial requests with loose_route().

Cheers,
Daniel

On 04/12/14 13:35, Ben Langfeld wrote:
> In that case the issue would have to be with the Kamailio-based edge
> proxy which is not routing based on the second Route in the list. Is
> that a known issue? I can provide more details if you think I'm on the
> right track.
>
> On 4 December 2014 at 10:09, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
> <miconda at gmail.com <mailto:miconda at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hello,
>
>     having more record-route addresses in the same header, separated
>     by comma, it is valid. Other headers (Via, Record-Route,
>     Supported, Required ...) can have same format, it is a matter of
>     UAC how it builds them, each with a header name or all under same
>     header name.
>
>     Cheers,
>     Daniel
>
>
>     On 04/12/14 12:24, Ben Langfeld wrote:
>>     I'm facing a problem which I believe may be a bug in the
>>     registrar module's lookup. When a registration comes with
>>     multiple Path headers, these are recorded in the location table
>>     as comma separated. When the lookup is performed and these are
>>     used to construct the Route header(s) on an INVITE, this
>>     comma-separated list is not split into multiple Route headers,
>>     but instead included verbatim in a single header.
>>
>>     Here comes my theory for how this breaks my scenario:
>>
>>     When the INVITE then reaches the first hop (first Path header,
>>     also Kamailio), relay() sees that the Route header is itself
>>     and/or sees that there is only one Route header.
>>
>>     The observed result is that the first hop then sends the INVITE
>>     directly to the Contact, instead of via the second hop.
>>
>>     An example of the situation I'm facing is shown
>>     in https://gist.github.com/benlangfeld/b374a0ce0bdb6bdc35e7.
>>
>>     Is there a particular reason the combined path is not split on
>>     lookup? Is this a bug / oversight? Am I crazy?
>>
>>     Thanks!
>>     Ben
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
>>     sr-users at lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users at lists.sip-router.org>
>>     http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
>     -- 
>     Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>     http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda> - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
>     list
>     sr-users at lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users at lists.sip-router.org>
>     http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
>

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20141204/0d2d973f/attachment.html>