Re: [Users] CANCEL problem

Bogdan, The problem is still there and actually I can't see any difference. 0(14899) INVITE: cseq=102: ruri=sip:xyz_100_1_st2@192.168.83.61 received from 192.168.80.26:5060 0(14899) INVITE: cseq=102: looked up: sip:xyz_100_1_st2@192.168.0.249:5060 flags: 00000040 0(14899) INVITE: cseq=102: sip:xyz_100_1_st2@192.168.0.249:5060: RELAYING to sip:192.168.76.250:1083 (flags: 00000040)... 0(14899) CANCEL: cseq=102: ruri=sip:xyz_100_1_st2@192.168.83.61 received from 192.168.80.26:5060 0(14899) CANCEL: cseq=102: looked up: sip:xyz_100_1_st2@192.168.0.249:5060 flags: 00000040 0(14899) CANCEL: cseq=102: sip:xyz_100_1_st2@192.168.0.249:5060: RELAYING to sip:192.168.76.250:1083 (flags: 00000040)... 0(14899) ACK: cseq=102: ruri=sip:xyz_100_1_st2@192.168.83.61 received from 192.168.80.26:5060 0(14899) <null>: cseq=102: onreply_route_log: received: 100 Trying from 192.168.76.250:1083 0(14899) <null>: cseq=102: onreply_route_log: received: 180 Ringing from 192.168.76.250:1083 ngrep shows that CANCEL is never get sent to the user xyz_100_1_st2 at 192.168.76.250:1083 Michael On Monday 15 August 2005 01:03 pm, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote: >Hi Michael, > >I added in TM some code which should solve this problem - unfortunately >is not tested yet since the scenario is quite difficult to reproduce. >Can you please give it a try a report de output - crash, the same or >success? > >thanks and regards, >bogdan > >Michael Ulitskiy wrote: > > > >>Great! Thanks Bogdan! I'll be the first to test it. >>I just wanted to point out that it's really amusing how responsive >>openser developers are and how impressive openser development >>pace is. Very good experience so far. >>Thanks a lot. >> >>Michael >> >>On Wednesday 03 August 2005 11:32 am, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote: >> >> >> >> >>>Hi Michael, >>> >>>that's exactly the trick I wanted to try to solve this issue (see my >>>previous email)...but I will have to dig to see how difficult is to >>>implement. >>> >>>regards, >>>bogdan >>> >>>