Re: [SR-Users] continue processing route script if no response from gateway

JR, Maybe for subsequent routes you'd like to use $oU (original URI Username) that is the original number you intend to route. Rgds, Uriel On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 1:23 PM, JR Richardson <jmr.richardson(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Henning Westerholt > <henning.westerholt(a)1und1.de> wrote: > > On Thursday 27 May 2010, JR Richardson wrote: > >> > i assume according your description that the GW in question don't > >> > send a > >> > provisional response. Then the tm module should generate a internal > >> > 408 > >> > after fr_timer interval which you could then catch in a > >> > failure_route. Do > >> > you armed the appropriate failure_route in your cfg? > >> > >> Yes, the gateway is totally off-line so no response comes back.  I do > >> have failure_route in the config.  This is related to another active > >> post from me "Carrierroute failover domain not working" so I'm sure > >> this is a redundant post, but your input is appreciated. > >> > >> The pastebin has my kamailio.cfg, the kamailio debug trace and the > >> error received by sipp and the ngrep capture. > >> > >> http://pastebin.com/VQziKYjE > > > > Hi JR, > > > > from the logs: > > > > INFO:carrierroute:cr_do_route: rewrite_uri_recursor doesn't complete, > > uri 65, > > carrier 1, domain 2 > > > > this means that there was an error during the invocation of the cr_route > > in > > the failure_route[2]. Can you check if you've a rule with domain 2 in > > your > > carrierroute table? > > > > And you probably also want to use revert_uri() and append_branch(); in > > the > > failure_route before respectivly after the new cr_route, otherwise > > you'll > > probably run in to problems as well. I just noticed that there is an > > error in > > the first example in the cr docs, i'll fix it now. The second example > > uses > > this two commands. > > > > Regards, > > > > Henning > > > Ok, so I think we are on to something, in the first transaction the > uri was 3465@ which matched the database entry 34 in carrier 1 domain > 1, but I also had strip_prefix-2 in there as well, so when the call > goes to the failure route the uri changes to 65@, which did not have a > match in carrier 1 domain 2. > > So to test, I took the prefix matching and the strip_prefix out and > simplified the database entry to this: > > carrierroute table: > carrier 1, domain 1, host A > carrier 1, domain 1, host B > carrier 1, domain 2, host C > carrier 1, domain 2, host D > > carrierfailureroute table: > carrier 1, domain 1, host A, next domain 2 > carrier 1, domain 1, host B, next domain 2 > carrier 1, domain 2, host C, next domain 1 > carrier 1, domain 2, host D, next domain 1 > > So now I see a call come in to kamailio and if host A & B are > off-line, I see in the debug the failure_route try to send the call to > host C & D, but I still have an error because I don't have a proper > branch route setup, and this is confusing, I don't understand what > that means?  Here is the error: > > The uri is 3477@, call come in and hits the route[2], then goes to > failure_route. > > May 27 11:04:04 [25716] INFO:carrierroute:cr_do_route: uri 3477 was > rewritten to sip:3477@10.10.14.104, carrier 1, domain 2 > May 27 11:04:04 [25716] ERROR:tm:t_forward_nonack: no branch for > forwarding > May 27 11:04:04 [25716] ERROR:tm:w_t_relay: t_forward_nonack failed > May 27 11:04:04 [25716] ERROR:tm:t_forward_nonack: no branch for > forwarding > May 27 11:04:04 [25716] ERROR:tm:w_t_relay: t_forward_nonack failed > > Here is the config snip: > > route[2] { >        if(!cr_route("1", "1", "$rU", "$rU", "call_id")){ >                sl_send_reply("403", "Not allowed"); >        } else { >                t_on_failure("2"); >                        t_relay(); >        } > } > > failure_route[2] { >        revert_uri(); >        if (t_check_status("404|408|5[0-9][0-9]")) { >                if(!cr_route("1", "2", "$rU", "$rU", "call_id")){ >                        t_reply("403", "Not allowed"); >                } else { >                        t_relay(); >                } >       } > } > > So I guess I'm stuck on the error "ERROR:tm:t_forward_nonack: no > branch for forwarding".  I'm not sure how to setup a branch route from > the failure route.