Well, this is the way it should be. From SER's perspective, there is an early dialog going on with SEMS that is likely to result in a dialog and it should NOT cancel. I'm sure there is an RFC that describes this call scenario, I seem to remember reading something, but I don't remember good enough the scenario to try to describe it here. However, I don't know which one :-) You probably don't get into failure route either, because all the branches haven't failed yet, so you are definitely on the wrong track.

Would be nice if you post the solution in a how-to at http://iptel.org/ when you figure it out!
g-)

Vamsi Pottangi wrote:

Hi,

In my test setup, I have SER as proxy and SEMS as announcement server. In SER config I'm sending forking invite to SEMS using append_branch for every call made. For example when User1 dials User2, SER send INVITES to both SEMS and User2, while the User2 phone rings, announcement is played from SEMS to User1 using the early media 183 session progress message. Once the User2 answers the call, a CANCEL message is sent to SEMS and normal conversation happens between User1 and User2 which is expected.

The problem which I'm facing is that when User2 doesn't answer the call or if rejects the call, SER never sends CANCEL to SEMS, so the annoucement is being played continously to User1 and User1 is unaware of the remote party status. How can I configure the SER script to handle such unanswered or call reject cases and send CANCEL to SEMS and inform User1 about the unanswered or cancel status?

Does it cancel 183 progress only in case of 200 OK from other invite session? how can we handle others like 408, 486 etc?

I'm not pasting my ser.cfg here because it is the basic sample script with just append_branch("SEMS") in case of INVITE.

Did anybody tried out such scenarios? Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
~Vamsi
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers@lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
  