[Users] cancel processing

[Jose Antonio Garvayo]

I am much in favor of the second one ... thought the other solution is OK
also

On 2/2/06, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <daniel at voice-system.ro> wrote:
>
> Here is the result. By ignoring the R-URI when matching the INVITE
> transaction, OpenSER becomes not RFC3261 compliant. In chapter 9.1.
> Client behavior when canceling it is stated as MUST that R-URI must be
> the same.
>
> <snip>
>
>    The following procedures are used to construct a CANCEL request.  The
>    Request-URI, Call-ID, To, the numeric part of CSeq, and From header
>    fields in the CANCEL request MUST be identical to those in the
>    request being cancelled, including tags.
>
> </snip>
>
> Because the R-URI is not the same, OpenSER generates another branch id.
>
> What should be the solution, to remove the ruri_matching flag from
> OpenSER and have it all the time RFC-compliant, or keep ruri_matching
> and re-use the Via branch id from INVITE. What OpenSER users would like
> more?
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
> On 02/02/06 17:44, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
> > You are right, I missed the branch value. I will investigate further,
> > at least the initial INVITE transaction is matched, since the R-URI is
> > restored. The problem should be in branch id generation.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Daniel
> >
> >
> > On 02/02/06 15:54, Jose Antonio Garvayo wrote:
> >> Hello Daniel,
> >>
> >> Thanks for your response, but I still think there's an error in
> >> openser. Let me explain it:
> >> [...]
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20060203/ded9901c/attachment.htm