Re: [SR-Users] Kamailio not increasing cseq

Daniel, Attached will you find the discussion in FreeSWITCH forums. Please take a look. Thanks Ragards, Camila *From:* Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com] *Sent:* viernes, 01 de marzo de 2013 14:26 *To:* Camila Troncoso; SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List *Subject:* Re: [SR-Users] Kamailio not increasing cseq Hello, I am a bit surprised by this behaviour in freeswitch. Do you have a link on the discussion you had on freeswitch forums? Maybe I can understand better from there what is the problem. In this case, it should be different also the branch parameter in top Via of the request received by freeswitch. Practically, this is SIP serial forking, one of the basic flows in SIP. increased in this case. Cheers, Daniel On 2/28/13 6:45 PM, Camila Troncoso wrote: Daniel, Any further Help you can give me? Regards, Camila *From:* Camila Troncoso [mailto:ctroncoso@redvoiss.net] *Sent:* jueves, 21 de febrero de 2013 9:52 *To:* &#39;miconda(a)gmail.com&#39;com'; 'SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List' *Subject:* RE: [SR-Users] Kamailio not increasing cseq Hi Daniel, In deed the Ruri is the only difference with the second invite. For the first Invite, I received an “503 Service unavailable” from the gateway , it goues trough the SBC and it is pass to the LCR so it reroutes the call to the second gateway in the cloud. I asked in FreeSWITCH forum for this issue and they said that the problem is Cseq not increasing, Freeswitch doesn’t take Ruri as compare. Regards, Camila *From:* sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [ mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org<sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>] *On Behalf Of *Daniel-Constantin Mierla *Sent:* jueves, 21 de febrero de 2013 5:08 *To:* SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) - Users Mailing List *Subject:* Re: [SR-Users] Kamailio not increasing cseq Hello, On 2/20/13 7:44 PM, Camila Troncoso wrote: Hi all, I’m working for a while with Kamailio+Freeswitch as SBC. I have this structure: * * When I make a call from one client connected to LCR, it is route to my SBC and afterwards to his destiny in the cloud passing though a gateway. When the destiny is unreachable, the LCR reroutes the call to another gateway. Sometimes the LCR send this retry again to the SBC , because the second gateway is also in the cloud, but when this happens, FreeSWITCH answer with : “482 Request merged” because it detects that is the same call. This is because the second INVITE has the same Call-ID and same Cseq. Kamailio *is not* increasing CSeq. Is there a way to resolve this? it is a second branch, the top via header of the second invite should have a different branch parameter than the previous one. Freeswitch should detect that and handle it as a separate branch of the call, too. Try changing the r-uri a bit and see if works (e.g., set a prefix that you remove it if set), as an workaround. Also, is the CANCEL sent to Freeswitch for first branch? Or is Freeswitch sending a negative reply? Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference, April 16-17, 2013, Berlin - http://conference.kamailio.com - -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio World Conference, April 16-17, 2013, Berlin - http://conference.kamailio.com -