On 12/10/09 3:02 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
El Jueves, 10 de Diciembre de 2009, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribió:
does the 503 reply include a retry-after header?
Does Kamailio behaviour depends on that header?
yes, this is what I can tell from sources. Personally, I haven't used it so far, therefore I haven't checked the specks.
The new tm, for K 3.0, does not have it.
Cheers, Daniel
If so IMHO it's not correct.
I've joined long discussions in sip-implementors about 503 with/without Retry-After header. Some people think that a 503 without this header must be considered as a 500. But after discussions this assumption is not correct and a 503 must be considered similary even if it doesn't contain this header.
BTW RFC 3263 (Locating SIP Servers) says nothing about 500 error, neither about Retry-After header in 503 replies. It considers a 503 with/without Retry-After in same way.
IMHO Kamailio/SR should consider Retry-After just as informative but never change the routing/failover behavior based on it.
Regards.