[SR-Users] dns failover and branches

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

On 19.07.17 10:44, Juha Heinanen wrote:
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
>
>> Is the branch parameter in the top Via of the second INVITE sent out
>> different than for the first INVITE (last digit incremented by 1 or
>> so)?
> Thanks for your reply.  Yes it is:
>
> In the first INVITE:
>
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP x.x.x.x:5060;branch=z9hG4bKa049.25c648aa425f43b7b2382d86a63054bb.0;i=1.
>
> In the second INVITE:
>
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP x.x.x.x:5060;branch=z9hG4bKa049.25c648aa425f43b7b2382d86a63054bb.1;i=1.
>
>
OK, so it is creating a new branch structure. That could explain why the
branch flags from previous INVITE are not there. If it is only the
branch flags missing (and the headers changes are already propagated), I
expect to be an easy patch. I will look into it very soon if nobody else
does it meanwhile.

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio Advanced Training - www.asipto.com
Kamailio World Conference - www.kamailioworld.com