[SR-Users] Should I ignore Route header in ACK?

[Yuriy Gorlichenko]

Hi
I know that this is not question too much close to the kamialio users but
mostly losed to the RFC specifiacations but this community looks like
pretty much close to it that is why I want to ask this question here,
that's why sorry and thanks for help in this question:

I have a situation when provider sends me 200 response with Request-Route
header and changed contact header:

Means response comes from
1.1.1.1:5060
Request-Route contains:
1.1.1.1:5060
But Contact contains:
1.1.1.1:5061

My ACK (handled by kamailio) goes to the 1.1.1.1:5060 as it setted up at
the Route Hedaer of ACK (because of Request-Route)

but provider says me that i should use Contact for the ACK


I was surprised because of
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3261#section-12.2.1.1
and
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3261#section-8.1.2

Says that I should use Route header for reaching destination
But I was surprised second time when tested this scenario with FreeSwitch
and another softphone (as UA) because of it both sends ACK to the based on
Contact address and ignores Route

I just wanna ask if I missed some scenario in the RFC when it is described
to ignore Route header for the UA

(I know that I use kamailio on my case as proxy server but should
understand finally who should make changes with packet handling)

Thanks one more time for the resonses and sorry one more time for the goal
of this question that belongs to the kamailio just partially
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20180701/a3834aad/attachment.html>