[Kamailio-Users] ACKed dialog remains in state 3 instead of 4

[catalina oancea]

Hi Daniel,

Actually reading RFC 3261 I see that the same callid must be used:

This
   Note that when requests are retried after certain
   failure responses that solicit an amendment to a request (for
   example, a challenge for authentication), these retried requests are
   not considered new requests, and therefore do not need new Call-ID
   header fields;

I tried xlog to print $dlg(ref) when receiving 407, in the
failure_route (actually it's 401, but that doesn't matter) and it
printed <null>.

I also printed the dialogs using mi-fifo after the call was and it
only showed one dialog.

I don't know how long the first dialog lasts but I am sure that it is
in the list because I added a debug message in the source printing
"dialog_deleted" when the dialog is found and it is in state deleted.

Why is it in state deleted and not actually removed? Why does the
search stop when the dialog is found but it is in state deleted? And
shouldn't there be only one dialog for both INVITEs, since, the callid
and from tag is the same?

Many thanks,
Catalina


2009/5/28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com>:
> Hello,
>
> On 05/27/2009 06:44 PM, catalina oancea wrote:
>> Yeah ok, but this is not the issue here.
>>
>> Even if I use record-routing, if I don't use the fast-matching cookie,
>> the problem I described still remains.
>>
> as I got from the diagram in your first email, second call, coming after
> 407, preserves the call-id and from tag?
>
> According to RFC, this is a completely new dialog and should use
> different values.
>
> Anyhow, after you send back the challenge, can you print with xlog
> $dlg(ref) and paste it here? Is the ended dialog staying for long time
> (you can use mi to list dlgs)?
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel
>
>>
>>
>> 2009/5/27 Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com>:
>>
>>> Catalina,
>>>
>>> catalina oancea wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> From what I know the record-route header is not compulsory, and
>>>> dialog-matching can also be done using rfc dialog-matching instead of
>>>> the did parameter in record-route (modparam("dialog",
>>>> "dlg_match_mode", 2)). This is what I am trying to use, I don't want
>>>> to use the record-route header at all.
>>>>
>>> It is true that you do not have to use the dialog fast-matching cookie
>>> parameter in the Record-Route header.
>>>
>>> However, you need the Record-Route header in order for the proxy to have
>>> visibility into subsequent sequential requests within the dialog, so you
>>> might as well use the parameter for faster matching.
>>>
>>> In other words, if you don't add Record-Route, your proxy won't see BYEs,
>>> re-INVITEs, etc.  See RFC 3261 20.30
>>> (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3261.txt):
>>>
>>> 20.30 Record-Route
>>>
>>>   The Record-Route header field is inserted by proxies in a request to
>>>   force future requests in the dialog to be routed through the proxy.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Alex
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alex Balashov
>>> Evariste Systems
>>> Web    : http://www.evaristesys.com/
>>> Tel    : (+1) (678) 954-0670
>>> Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671
>>> Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.kamailio.org
>> http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>> http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>
> --
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
> http://www.asipto.com/
>
>