6 Apr
2020
6 Apr
'20
3:10 p.m.
Hello,
that change was pushed to 5.3 at that moment, as I wrote in the email.
If you still get the issue with branch 5.3, let me know.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 06.04.20 10:48, David Escartin wrote:
Dear Daniel
hope everything is ok.
Sorry if i missed something, but this was changed already backported
from master to 5.3 yet?
thanks alot and regards
david
El vie., 21 feb. 2020 a las 11:20, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
(<miconda(a)gmail.com <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>>) escribió:
Hello,
ok, good to know works fine now! Thanks for troubleshooting and
testing.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21.02.20 10:11, David Escartin wrote:
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
hello Daniel
I made a try on the latest master branch commit and seems ok now
thanks a lot!
david
El vie., 21 feb. 2020 a las 8:45, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
(<miconda(a)gmail.com <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>>) escribió:
Hello,
good catch, I pushed a patch to propagate xflags on
msg_apply_changes() in master and backported to 5.3 and 5.2.
Give it a try with any of the branches and let me know if
works fine now.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21.02.20 08:29, David Escartin wrote:
--
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 Advanced Training - March 9-11, 2020, Berlin - www.asipto.com
<http://www.asipto.com>
Kamailio World Conference - April 27-29, 2020, in Berlin -- www.kamailioworld.com
<http://www.kamailioworld.com>
Hello Daniel
i made some more tests and i could see that it's after
executing msg_apply_changes function that the xflag is lost.
The original message transaction flags remain activated
after msg_apply_changes.
i did an execution on debug but i saw no information more than
2(5231) INFO: Talos-Test Call 500000 / Call-ID
1-25549(a)1.1.18.171 <mailto:1-25549@1.1.18.171>: We activate
TEST_XFLAG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2(5231) INFO: Talos-Test Call 500000 / Call-ID
1-25549(a)1.1.18.171 <mailto:1-25549@1.1.18.171>: TEST_XFLAG
TRUE!!!!
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/msg_translator.c:3262]:
sip_msg_update_buffer(): SIP message content updated - reparsing
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/msg_parser.c:610]:
parse_msg(): SIP Request:
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/msg_parser.c:612]:
parse_msg(): method: <INVITE>
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/msg_parser.c:614]:
parse_msg(): uri: <sip:7777777@2.2.2.26:5060
<http://sip:7777777@2.2.2.26:5060>>
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/msg_parser.c:616]:
parse_msg(): version: <SIP/2.0>
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/parse_via.c:1303]:
parse_via_param(): Found param type 235, <rport> = <n/a>;
state=6
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/parse_via.c:1303]:
parse_via_param(): Found param type 232, <branch> =
<z9hG4bK-5aaf0472f30d11e68aeff8bc1239f520>; state=6
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/parse_via.c:1303]:
parse_via_param(): Found param type 253, <sig> = <74e198e2>;
state=16
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/parse_via.c:2639]:
parse_via(): end of header reached, state=5
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/msg_parser.c:498]:
parse_headers(): Via found, flags=2
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/msg_parser.c:500]:
parse_headers(): this is the first via
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/parse_addr_spec.c:864]:
parse_addr_spec(): end of header reached, state=10
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/msg_parser.c:171]:
get_hdr_field(): <To> [83];
uri=[sip:+9934355692006294@1.1.14.173
<mailto:sip%3A%2B9934355692006294@1.1.14.173>;transport=udp;user=phone]
2(5231) DEBUG: <core> [core/parser/msg_parser.c:174]:
get_hdr_field(): to body
["+0034355692006294"<sip:+9934355692006294@1.1.14.173
<mailto:sip%3A%2B9934355692006294@1.1.14.173>;transport=udp;user=phone>
], to tag []
2(5231) INFO: Talos-Test Call 500000 / Call-ID
1-25549(a)1.1.18.171 <mailto:1-25549@1.1.18.171>: TEST_XFLAG
after msg_apply_changes FALSE!!!!
best regards
david
El jue., 20 feb. 2020 a las 20:45, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
(<miconda(a)gmail.com <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>>) escribió:
Hello,
have you set the flags before creating the transaction?
Can you test if you set a normal flag and an xflag at
the same place in request route, is the first visible in
onreply route and the xflag not?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 20.02.20 18:05, David Escartin wrote:
--
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 Advanced Training - March 9-11, 2020, Berlin - www.asipto.com
<http://www.asipto.com>
Kamailio World Conference - April 27-29, 2020, in Berlin -- www.kamailioworld.com
<http://www.kamailioworld.com>
Dear all
one quick question, reading the module corex doc, seems
that xflag are message(transaction) flags. But I made a
test and seems for some reason the flag is not seeing
activated at the onreply_route, when it's activated on
the request route. Seemed more like a script flag
behaviour. Maybe I'm missing something?
thanks a lot and regards
david
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users@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 Advanced Training - March 9-11, 2020, Berlin - www.asipto.com
<http://www.asipto.com>
Kamailio World Conference - April 27-29, 2020, in Berlin --
www.kamailioworld.com <http://www.kamailioworld.com>