[SR-Users] Kamailio topoh and t_check_trans not working.

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello,

not sure about what you mean with "the same call scenario but with mask
call ID disabled it works correctly".

Initially you said about t_check_trans(): "once that the BYE belongs to
an existing dialog it must return true". Again, this is not something
t_check_trans() does, only if you have same BYE processed at the same
time, then it should detect retransmission, otherwise this function
should do nothing.

Maybe there is other issue you are facing over all.

Cheers,
Daniel


On 16.10.18 20:56, José Seabra wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> Thank you for the clarification regarding to the t_check_trans.
>
> Kamailio only receives one BYE, pls note that in the same call
> scenario but with mask call ID disabled it works correctly.
>
> we are using the default kamailio script, we just included the topoh
> module on it.
>
> Thank you for the help
> Best regards
> José
>
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com
> <mailto:miconda at gmail.com>> escreveu no dia terça, 16/10/2018 à(s) 18:31:
>
>     Hello,
>
>     t_check_trans() is checking if there is a retransmission, not if a
>     request belongs to a dialog.
>
>     Did you get the same BYE sent twice at more or less same time?
>
>     Cheers,
>     Daniel
>
>     On 16.10.18 18:00, José Seabra wrote:
>>     Hi all,
>>
>>     I noticed that using the module TOPOH with the parameter mask
>>     call id enabled and the t_check_trans together isn't working
>>     correctly.
>>
>>     When i receive the BYE message my script call the function
>>     t_check_trans() in order to check if a message belongs or is
>>     related to a transaction. This function always returns false when
>>     used with the topoh mask call id enabled, once that the BYE
>>     belongs to an existing dialog it must return true.
>>     In the logs it says something like transaction doesn't match
>>     dialog using the RFC3261.
>>
>>     If the TOPOH mask call id option is disabled everything works
>>     perfectly.
>>
>>     Anyone here already faced this behavior?
>>     Thanks 
>>     Regards
>>     -- 
>>     José Seabra
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>>     sr-users at lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users at lists.kamailio.org>
>>     https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
>     -- 
>     Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
>     www.twitter.com/miconda <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>
>     Kamailio World Conference -- www.kamailioworld.com <http://www.kamailioworld.com>
>     Kamailio Advanced Training, Nov 12-14, 2018, in Berlin -- www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Cumprimentos
> José Seabra

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio World Conference -- www.kamailioworld.com
Kamailio Advanced Training, Nov 12-14, 2018, in Berlin -- www.asipto.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20181017/d3618ccf/attachment.html>