Hello,
you should be able to disable sending internal replies inside tm in case
of t_relay() failure with:
*
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(a)lists.kamailio.org>
*Cc:* Kamailio (SER) - Development Mailing List
<sr-dev(a)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(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users