Contact from SER is NOT malformed. It is 100% compliant to the RFC3261 spec (see sections 20.10 and 25 of RFC 3261). in the grammar, contact expands to name-addr|addr-spec, with addr-spec being URI. Exapmles in the addr-spec for also appear throughout the spec. Thus I suggest that the softswitch vendor makes himself familiar with this document. As a workaround you may wish trying some manual tricks to form a reply which will make the UAC equipment happy (append_to_reply).
-jiri
p.s. interestingly, gl_redirect must be your own feature, so if you developed some extra SER code updating the way of generating Contacts in 3xx should not be a big deal. I just occur to think that doing it in public SER doesn't make much sense, because if there are multiple ways to do things in SIP, whichever you choose, you will find someone who is silly enough only to accept the opposite one :-)
At 20:57 26/03/2007, Jignesh Gandhi wrote:
Hello,
I am using SER as a redirect server. Recently I came across an issue where the 302 sent back by SER is not liked by a soft switch. Particularly , the format of the CONTACT field according to the softswitch..
Here is an excerpt of the 302 reply send back ...
Session Initiation Protocol Status-Line: SIP/2.0 302 MovedTemporarily Status-Code: 302 Resent Packet: True Suspected resend of frame: 73 Message Header To: <mailto:sip:12345@172.20.20.46sip:12345@172.20.20.46>;tag=b27e1a1d33761e85846fc98f5f3a7e58.dfa5 SIP to address: mailto:sip:12345@172.20.20.46sip:12345@172.20.20.46 SIP tag: b27e1a1d33761e85846fc98f5f3a7e58.dfa5 From: http://172.20.20.46172.20.20.46<mailto:sip:12345@172.20.20.46sip:12345@172.20.20.46>;tag=161dda6e SIP Display info: http://172.20.20.46172.20.20.46 SIP from address: mailto:sip:12345@172.20.20.46sip:12345@172.20.20.46 SIP tag: 161dda6e Via: SIP/2.0/UDP http://10.99.99.140:958510.99.99.140:9585;branch=z9hG4bK-d87543-730866470-1--d87543-;rport=9585 Call-ID: 95239a63f0347c53 CSeq: 1 INVITE Contact: sip:12345@172.20.20.37:5060 Server: Sip EXpress router (0.8.14 (i386/linux)) Content-Length: 0 Warning: 392 http://172.20.20.46:5060172.20.20.46:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=9550 req_src_ip=http://10.99.99.14010.99.99.140 req_src_port=9585 in_uri=mailto:sip:12345@172.20.20.46sip:12345@172.20.20.46 out_uri=sip:12345@172.20.20.37:5060 via_cnt==1
the softswitch is wanting the contact field with sip:xxxx@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060 like a FROM or TO URI.
Here is ser.cfg part that does the sl_send_reply();
# do a stateless redirect, if return code is correct if (method=="INVITE") { xlog("L_INFO", "SourceIP <%is> \n"); xlog("L_INFO", "From-uri<%fu>, r-uri <%ru> \n"); if (!gl_redirect()) { sl_send_reply("480", "TemporarilyUnavailable"); xlog("L_WARN", "Sending a 480 response with r-uri <%ru>\n"); break; } else { sl_send_reply("302", "MovedTemporarily"); xlog("L_DBG", "Sending a 302 response with r-uri <%ru>\n"); break; } };
Any help is appreciated.
thanks,
Jignesh Gandhi mailto:jigpgandhi@gmail.comjigpgandhi@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/