Hi all,
I've a Cisco PGW interconnecting with an OpenSER server. The INVITE is
sent to OpenSER, which does some record-routing via some different hops
and then sends back the 180 from the called party.
If the calling party now cancels the call, the PGW tries to loose-route
the CANCEL by adding the Route header to the CANCEL and altering the
R-URI, which is rejected by my OpenSER since I don't allow initial
loose-routing.
So the question is: is it valid for a CANCEL to carry a Route header
which wasn't available in the INVITE? ยง9.1 of RFC3261 says it MUST
contain the Route header if it was present in the request being
cancelled. What about the other way around? I heavily suspect it's
violating the RFC since CANCEL should be more or less a 1:1 copy of the
INVITE, but can anyone confirm this?
If it violates the RFC, anyone with some Cisco knowledge who knows how
to disable this behavior, or is it a known bug?
Cheers,
Andreas