Re: [SR-Users] Does failure_route for redirection covers all error cases ?

Hello, Not sure if I understood your question 100%. If you want to work on 480 replies in the failure_route, you should also include this in the t_check_status(..) function call. Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users &lt;sr-users-bounces(a)lists.kamailio.org&gt; On Behalf Of Liviu ANDRON Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 11:51 AM To: sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org Subject: [SR-Users] Does failure_route for redirection covers all error cases ? Hello, We are routing calls to FreeSWITCH servers. We have a failure routing mechanism in place, which looks pretty common from my research around: route[INVITE] { ... t_on_failure("REROUTE"); and failure_route[REROUTE] { if (t_is_canceled()) { exit; } // also 6xx ? if (t_check_status("5[0-9][0-9]") or (t_branch_timeout() and !t_branch_replied())) { // re-route to another available FreeSWITCH server } } The problem is that we don't capture all the failures we would like to, one such example being 480 sent by FreeSWITCH in various cases (even default in hangup_cause_to_sip, mod_sofia.c, https://github.com/signalwire/freeswitch/blob/master/src/mod/endpoints/mod_…), like a Python script crash, but also legitimate cases like "user not registered" (USER_NOT_REGISTERED). Are there other cases? Like a timeout replied (t_branch_timeout() and t_branch_replied()) which never recovers ? Shouldn't any t_branch_timeout() re-arm the failure route ? Thanks, Liviu