[SR-Users] [ *SPAM* 5.1 ] Re: carrierroute and failure route

[Yu Boot]

Problem was magically solved by replacing t_relay in CR route by route 
(RELAY) :)

And finally a question. Can't find answer in Kami docs. What 
loose_route() proc actually does? Check some parameters, rewrite other 
parameters? I think real routing is performed by R-URI manipulations and 
t_relay to actually send created message, isn't it?


04.08.2017 13:26, Sebastian Damm пишет:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Yu Boot <yu at yu-boot.ru> wrote:
>> I use this in WITHINDLG to handle reINVITEs
>>
>>          else if ( is_method("INVITE") ) {
>>                          record_route();
>>
>> or T.38 fax behind NAT doesn't work at all.
> Actually that shouldn't be the case. I know, T.38 needs a reINVITE,
> too, but the record route information is supplied in the 200 OK. (If
> it isn't than that's what's broken.) The route information doesn't
> change with reINVITEs, so there's no need to record-route reINVITEs.
>
> But if you really need the record-route there, then you need to call
> set_contact_alias() in the reply to your reINVITE. So you might have
> to add a different reply_route[reinvite] and set t_on_reply(reinvite)
> in the WITHINDLG route. But I really think that's not necessary.
>
> Sebastian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users