[SR-Users] handling of locally generated 478 errors

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello,

you should be able to disable sending internal replies inside tm in case
of t_relay() failure with:

  *
https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules/tm.html#tm.f.t_set_disable_internal_reply

The to handling in the IF branch of t_relay() execution if it returns
false. There is no need to use event_route from sl module in this case.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 27.11.20 09:41, Henning Westerholt wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>  
>
> any comment on this topic? Would be great to get an opinion at least
> on the first question, then I could document it or open an issue for it.
>
>  
>
> Thanks,
>
>  
>
> Henning
>
>  
>
> -- 
>
> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ <https://skalatan.de/blog/>
>
> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com <https://gilawa.com/>
>
>  
>
> *From:*Henning Westerholt
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 25, 2020 6:53 PM
> *To:* Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List <sr-users at lists.kamailio.org>
> *Cc:* Kamailio (SER) - Development Mailing List
> <sr-dev at lists.kamailio.org>
> *Subject:* handling of locally generated 478 errors
>
>  
>
> Hello,
>
>  
>
> I want to ask for your opinion on the best approach regarding the
> handling of locally generated 478 errors.
>
>  
>
> To give an example, like the ones generated from TM during t_relay()
> on an unresolvable destination.
>
>  
>
> Nov 25 17:40:13 kamailio[19345]: ERROR: {28607414 INVITE
> bba500ac-a9df-1239-6693-00505682c04d} tm [ut.h:286]: uri2dst2():
> failed to resolve "invalid.skalatan.de" :unresolvable A or AAAA
> request (-7)
> Nov 25 17:40:13 kamailio[19345]: ERROR: {28607414 INVITE
> bba500ac-a9df-1239-6693-00505682c04d} tm [t_fwd.c:1738]:
> t_forward_nonack(): failure to add branches
> Nov 25 17:40:13 kamailio[19345]: CRITICAL: {28607414 INVITE
> bba500ac-a9df-1239-6693-00505682c04d} rtpengine
> [../../core/parser/../ip_addr.h:658]: ip_addr2sbuf(): unknown address
> family 0
>
>  
>
> These errors will not show up in onreply or failure_route.  A long
> time ago this was discussed on the list [1], as some functionality
> were phased out out that support these scenarios.
>
>  
>
> Kamailio will try to generate a 478 with TM, this will obviously fail
> as well, and then generate a 478 with SL.
>
>  
>
> Question 1)
>
>  
>
> Is this intentional that the internally generated 478 is not showing
> up in the failure_route, like for for 408? This has been tested
> several times, but it is a complicated configuration.
>
>  
>
> Question 2)
>
>  
>
> Are there any other (better) ideas how to handle that besides using a
> “event_route[sl:local-response]” to catch this, e.g. to tear down
> otherwise stale rtpengine sessions etc..? As a side note,
> event_route[tm:local-response] seems not to work as well because of
> the tm failure.
>
>  
>
> Thanks,
>
>  
>
> Henning
>
>  
>
> [1]
> https://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/2011-June/069020.html
> <https://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/2011-June/069020.html>
>
>  
>
> -- 
>
> Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ <https://skalatan.de/blog/>
>
> Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com <https://gilawa.com/>
>
>  
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Funding: https://www.paypal.me/dcmierla

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20201127/e3d3f8ef/attachment.htm>