I have two window messenger 5.1 clients on the same subnet as the SER server w/ pa module. They subscribe/notify to each other ok. HOwever they cannot IM each other. The callee, after receiveing INVITE, sent back a 100 trying, then 200 OK, and then immediately BYE.

 

I searched thru archives and looks like this is a known issue with wm. What is the solution or workaround to this?

 

Here is the messages I captured:

 

U 10.1.104.251:1172 -> 10.1.104.254:5060
  INVITE sip:104pc1@10.1.104.254 SIP/2.0..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.1.104.251:8053
  ..Max-Forwards: 70..From: "104pc2@10.1.104.254" <sip:104pc2@10.1.104.254>;
  tag=d46c61cfc8bf4ae4942b0e9c2a2f38d7;epid=69200d1362..To: <sip:104pc1@10.1
  .104.254>..Call-ID: 7dc26db0eb374cedbfa098d8fb7e2796..CSeq: 1 INVITE..Cont
  act: <sip:10.1.104.251:8053>..User-Agent: RTC/1.3..Content-Type: applicati
  on/sdp..Content-Length: 119....v=0..o=- 0 0 IN IP4 10.1.104.251..s=session
  ..c=IN IP4 10.1.104.251..t=0 0..m=message 5060 sip sip:104pc2@10.1.104.254
  ..
#
U 10.1.104.254:5060 -> 10.1.104.251:8053
  SIP/2.0 100 trying -- your call is important to us..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.1.
  104.251:8053..From: "104pc2@10.1.104.254" <sip:104pc2@10.1.104.254>;tag=d4
  6c61cfc8bf4ae4942b0e9c2a2f38d7;epid=69200d1362..To: <sip:104pc1@10.1.104.2
  54>..Call-ID: 7dc26db0eb374cedbfa098d8fb7e2796..CSeq: 1 INVITE..Server: Si
  p EXpress router (0.10.99-dev30-tm-timers-pa-3 (i386/linux))..Content-Leng
  th: 0..Warning: 392 10.1.104.254:5060 "Noisy feedback tells:  pid=23866 re
  q_src_ip=10.1.104.251 req_src_port=1172 in_uri=sip:104pc1@10.1.104.254 out
  _uri=sip:10.1.104.248:13018 via_cnt==1"....
#
U 10.1.104.254:5060 -> 10.1.104.248:13018
  INVITE sip:10.1.104.248:13018 SIP/2.0..Record-Route: <sip:10.1.104.254;fta
  g=d46c61cfc8bf4ae4942b0e9c2a2f38d7;lr=on>..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.1.104.254;b
  ranch=z9hG4bK2216.fea17c01.0..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.1.104.251:8053..Max-Forw
  ards: 16..From: "104pc2@10.1.104.254" <sip:104pc2@10.1.104.254>;tag=d46c61
  cfc8bf4ae4942b0e9c2a2f38d7;epid=69200d1362..To: <sip:104pc1@10.1.104.254>.
  .Call-ID: 7dc26db0eb374cedbfa098d8fb7e2796..CSeq: 1 INVITE..Contact: <sip:
  10.1.104.251:8053>..User-Agent: RTC/1.3..Content-Type: application/sdp..Co
  ntent-Length: 119..P-hint: usrloc applied....v=0..o=- 0 0 IN IP4 10.1.104.
  251..s=session..c=IN IP4 10.1.104.251..t=0 0..m=message 5060 sip sip:104pc
  2@10.1.104.254..
#
U 10.1.104.248:1334 -> 10.1.104.254:5060
  SIP/2.0 100 Trying..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.1.104.254;branch=z9hG4bK2216.fea17
  c01.0..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.1.104.251:8053..From: "104pc2@10.1.104.254" <si
  p:104pc2@10.1.104.254>;tag=d46c61cfc8bf4ae4942b0e9c2a2f38d7;epid=69200d136
  2..To: <sip:104pc1@10.1.104.254>;tag=36f889ef11354d12890edd7a068dc893..Cal
  l-ID: 7dc26db0eb374cedbfa098d8fb7e2796..CSeq: 1 INVITE..User-Agent: RTC/1.
  3..Content-Length: 0....
#
U 10.1.104.248:1334 -> 10.1.104.254:5060
  SIP/2.0 200 OK..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.1.104.254;branch=z9hG4bK2216.fea17c01.
  0..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.1.104.251:8053..From: "104pc2@10.1.104.254" <sip:10
  4pc2@10.1.104.254>;tag=d46c61cfc8bf4ae4942b0e9c2a2f38d7;epid=69200d1362..T
  o: <sip:104pc1@10.1.104.254>;tag=36f889ef11354d12890edd7a068dc893..Call-ID
  : 7dc26db0eb374cedbfa098d8fb7e2796..CSeq: 1 INVITE..Record-Route: <sip:10.
  1.104.254;ftag=d46c61cfc8bf4ae4942b0e9c2a2f38d7;lr=on>..Contact: <sip:10.1
  .104.248:13018>..User-Agent: RTC/1.3..Content-Type: application/sdp..Conte
  nt-Length: 119....v=0..o=- 0 0 IN IP4 10.1.104.248..s=session..c=IN IP4 10
  .1.104.248..t=0 0..m=message 5060 sip sip:104pc1@10.1.104.254..
#
U 10.1.104.248:1334 -> 10.1.104.254:5060
  BYE sip:10.1.104.254;ftag=d46c61cfc8bf4ae4942b0e9c2a2f38d7;lr=on SIP/2.0..
  Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.1.104.248:13018..Max-Forwards: 70..From: <sip:104pc1@1
  0.1.104.254>;tag=36f889ef11354d12890edd7a068dc893..To: "104pc2@10.1.104.25
  4" <sip:104pc2@10.1.104.254>;tag=d46c61cfc8bf4ae4942b0e9c2a2f38d7;epid=692
  00d1362..Call-ID: 7dc26db0eb374cedbfa098d8fb7e2796..CSeq: 1 BYE..Route: <s
  ip:10.1.104.251:8053>..User-Agent: RTC/1.3..Content-Length: 0....
##