24 Jan
2020
24 Jan
'20
6:09 p.m.
On a side note, I think I might have found a bug for rtpengine_manage():
I'm under the impression that if called from within a branch_failure_route,
it will do an offer instead of a delete. Do you confirm and is this
intentional?
On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 11:06, Sebastian Damm <damm(a)sipgate.de> wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 8:29 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<miconda(a)gmail.com> wrote:
A remark for kamailio transaction states point of
view: in failure route
the entire transaction is in failed state, so there is not
active branch,
so at that point it should delete all (previous) rtpengine
sessions/branches.
This is what I had in mind. I don't think I end up in failure route if
one branch is answered. My Question was, how to handle the canceled
branch.
As I got it, the use of via-branch flag for
deleting a session makes
sense in event route for branch-failure, when other
branches can still be
active or one was answered.
Do branches that get cancelled due to another branch answering the
call go through the branch failure route?
Also in the case of parallel forking, if
via-branch is not give to
rtpengine offer command, does the 2nd (and the next)
rtpengine offer
command overwrite the previous one, so the rtpengine keeps only the data
from the last one?
We stumbled upon this problem only because we used rtpengine without
the branch parameter. And what we saw was that the second
rtpengine_offer overwrote the first one, making the first branch
impossible to be answered in certain scenarios.
Regards and thanks for all the answers so far.
Sebastian
--
Sebastian Damm
Voice Engineer
__________________________________________
sipgate GmbH
Gladbacher Straße 74 | 40219 Düsseldorf
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users