10 Sep
2008
10 Sep
'08
11:40 a.m.
Raúl Alexis Betancor Santana schrieb:
El Wednesday 10 September 2008 07:44:49 Klaus Darilion
escribió:
Yes. That is true.
The logic for the failure route handling is:
1. set the new destination (e.g. rewriteuri ....)
2. append branch
3. t_relay
It does not matter if this happens directly in the failure route or in
another route which is caklled by the failure route.
regards
klaus
Iñaki Baz Castillo schrieb:
But it's wrongly called, because he calls append_branch() on failure_route[1]
BEFORE calling route[2] and then inside route[2] he calls append_branch again,
so it's called twice. El Martes, 9 de Septiembre de 2008, Matthew
McGuire escribió:
Route[2] is called from the failure_route. Thus, the append_branch in
route[2] is necessary. Thanks for the pointers.
When I remove append_branch from the route blocks, for some reason,
rewritehostport fails in subsequent routes. No errors show up in the
log, but the call will proceed through each block, traceable by the log
statements, but the host ip address on the new invites is the same as
the first invite.
I just can sure you that these append_branch() in route[1] and
route[2]
are completely wrongs since they are duplicating the original request, no
more.