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

Alex Balashov abalashov at evaristesys.com
Sun Jul 1 09:28:29 CEST 2018


Hi,

Record-Route from the UAS in the 2xx response to the initial INVITE
transaction should be recast a Route set in in-dialog messages
originating from the caller, of which an end-to-end ACK is one.

The next Route header should be followed for reaching the next hop on the
network and transport level. The request URI should cosmetically be
equivalent to the Contact URI of the far end, but the Route header will
cause a deviation in where the request is actually sent.

This is entirely appropriate and correct. Nobody should be ignoring a
Route header.

-- Alex

On Sun, Jul 01, 2018 at 10:27:00AM +0300, Yuriy Gorlichenko wrote:

> 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

> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users


-- 
Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC

Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) 
Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/



More information about the sr-users mailing list