11 Nov
2021
11 Nov
'21
2:48 p.m.
On 11 Nov 2021, at 07:22, Olle E. Johansson
<oej(a)edvina.net> wrote:
I thought this would be possible with TCP too.
I looked at the outbound module but this is a 'drop in' replacement for something
that already exists, so I'm trying to avoid rewriting headers as would be required for
flow IDs etc, however it's a definite preferred method for improvement.
As an aside, and it may be the same issue in
https://www.mail-archive.com/sr-users@lists.kamailio.org/msg15589.html
<https://www.mail-archive.com/sr-users@lists.kamailio.org/msg15589.html>, when you
force an outbound socket on a specific port and a reply is received on that port, both $Rp
and $Rut show the port on the first listen directive, not the port it was actually
received on, which makes it a bit harder to do what I was trying to as well :/
Ross
10 nov. 2021 kl. 18:21 skrev Ross McKillop
<ross(a)rsmck.co.uk <mailto:ross@rsmck.co.uk>>:
Hi,
Thanks, I was almost certain that is set but it seems it may not be so will double check
that, thank you :)
Now to solve the other issue….
Just a nit-picking note: All these are
non-standard fixes. The standard based way is to use the outbound module, it’s the way to
allow the sip server to use an inbound TCP connection for outbound requests. This applies
to client2server connections.
For server2server connections there is a requirement of mutual TLS auth in order to be
able to reuse the connection in both directions