4 Dec
2014
4 Dec
'14
5:54 p.m.
Thanks Daniel. Config can be found here:
https://gist.github.com/benlangfeld/1b61f41c31129e8f2db3
INVITEs as provided (with a Route with two comma-separated elements) get
routed via the Contact header (instead of the second Route element).
When I use loose_route() on the INVITE, it goes into a loop in the edge
proxy (https://gist.github.com/benlangfeld/99af9045e70a9bb4eeed), even
though the IP it selects to route to (.14) is not the same server.
Ben
On 4 December 2014 at 12:16, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
You should put the config somewhere for review. Note
that default
kamailio.cfg ignores Route headers for initial requests. You have to handle
initial requests with loose_route().
Cheers,
Daniel
On 04/12/14 13:35, Ben Langfeld wrote:
In that case the issue would have to be with the Kamailio-based edge proxy
which is not routing based on the second Route in the list. Is that a known
issue? I can provide more details if you think I'm on the right track.
On 4 December 2014 at 10:09, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hello,
having more record-route addresses in the same header, separated by
comma, it is valid. Other headers (Via, Record-Route, Supported, Required
...) can have same format, it is a matter of UAC how it builds them, each
with a header name or all under same header name.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 04/12/14 12:24, Ben Langfeld wrote:
I'm facing a problem which I believe may be a bug in the registrar
module's lookup. When a registration comes with multiple Path headers,
these are recorded in the location table as comma separated. When the
lookup is performed and these are used to construct the Route header(s) on
an INVITE, this comma-separated list is not split into multiple Route
headers, but instead included verbatim in a single header.
Here comes my theory for how this breaks my scenario:
When the INVITE then reaches the first hop (first Path header, also
Kamailio), relay() sees that the Route header is itself and/or sees that
there is only one Route header.
The observed result is that the first hop then sends the INVITE
directly to the Contact, instead of via the second hop.
An example of the situation I'm facing is shown in
https://gist.github.com/benlangfeld/b374a0ce0bdb6bdc35e7.
Is there a particular reason the combined path is not split on lookup?
Is this a bug / oversight? Am I crazy?
Thanks!
Ben
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
listsr-users@lists.sip-router.orghttp://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierlahttp://twitter.com/#!/miconda -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierlahttp://twitter.com/#!/miconda -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda