23 Aug
2013
23 Aug
'13
12:22 p.m.
On 8/23/13 12:20 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
it seems that the flag not to generate the internal reply was lost
when adopting the new ser tm module.
Can you try the attached patch on 4.0.x?
Once applied and kamailio reinstalled, before t_relay() use:
t_disable_internal_reply();
correction for the above line, the function name is:
t_set_disable_internal_reply();
Daniel
An the return code should be -4 in this case.
Let me know if works and I will push the fixes in the git repo, with
updates to docs.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 8/23/13 12:13 PM, Steve Davies wrote:
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
On 23 August 2013 11:18, Steve Davies <steve(a)connection-telecom.com
<mailto:steve@connection-telecom.com>> wrote:
Here's what I put in RELAY route block:
$var(rr) = t_relay();
xlog("L_NOTICE","SLD: in RELAY, t_relay returned
$var(rr)\n");
if (!$var(rr)) {
sl_reply_error();
}
In 4.0.3, t_relay gives a -1 in the case that there is a physical
network issue (in my test I have a "-j DROP" iptables rule)
Trying to find a way to detect the case where t_relay fails but
doesn't call the failure block. I dumped some hopeful looking pseudo
variables, and tried to use an avp to communicate from the failure
branch back to the relay point.
I tried this:
$avp(senttoast) = 0;
$var(rr) = t_relay();
xlog("L_NOTICE","SLD: in RELAY, t_relay returned $var(rr)
err.rcode is $err.rcode t_r_c is $T_reply_code sent =
$avp(senttoast)\n");
if ($var(rr) < 0) {
sl_reply_error();
}
and in my failure block I set $avp(senttoast) to 1.
I get:
Aug 23 12:07:02 ubuntu /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[7819]: NOTICE:
<script>: SLD: in RELAY, t_relay returned -1 err.rcode is <null>
t_r_c is 100 sent = 0
In the case of a 477 being sent back. So I can't find anything
distinctive so far.
In the case of a soft failure (I have the upstream send a 500):
Aug 23 12:09:32 ubuntu /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[7817]: NOTICE:
<script>: SLD: in RELAY, t_relay returned 1 err.rcode is <null> t_r_c
is 100 sent = 0
So the same.
From the trace I can see that the failure block is only executed
after the t_relay returns. The failure block runs on a different pid.
So there is a race. Or maybe the avp doesn't work across branches or
something?
Clues would be welcome!
Steve
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda -http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda