30 Nov
2007
30 Nov
'07
5:32 p.m.
Yes, it's a real pain. This particular carrier has a requirement that
request, From, and To URIs are all in E.164 format for some reason.
The other problem I have with the To header is RFC 3398 section
7.2.1.1, specifically the part that reads:
"If the primary telephone number in the Request-URI and that of the To
header are at variance, then the To header SHOULD be used to populate
an OCN parameter. Otherwise the To header SHOULD be ignored."
That one sentence is a huge pain in my backside. There are *much*
better headers for that. All sorts of unexpected things can happen
when the gateway implements that, and the to uri != ruri :(. Like the
first time we noticed that mapping a speed dial to someone's cell
phone, and it went to VM, and we got the voicemail box for the speed
dial digits, *not* the actual number in the request uri! I use
redirects to implement speed dial and vertical service codes now
because of that.
Oh well, I press on for a work-around.
On Nov 30, 2007 2:10 AM, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:
Phil D'Amore schrieb:
Hi Everyone...
I'm looking for some advice. Let's say I have a To: header in an
initial INVITE:
To: Bob <sip:8005551212@sip.example.com>
Due to carrier requirements, it really needs to be:
To: Bob <sip:+18005551212@sip.example.com>
Although you do not want to hear this answer:
Tell your carrier to fix it's system! Routing on To-header is bullshit.
regards
klaus
I'm not asking how to do it. I know I can use some textops functions
to make this happen. I also know that doing this might break
something.
The uac module already nicely handles the From: header in a way that
doesn't break things. I thought about extending this to handle To:,
but I worried that the Record-Route header might get too long for some
UAs if I wind up having to change both headers. The To tag must also
be dealt with somehow, which I think might make it harder to do than
From.
Using a 302 response is not an option for me, and I'm really trying to
avoid getting a B2BUA involved with this right now. Moving from
openser 1.1.1 to 1.3 is enough for me without changing my architecture
;). I'm wondering what would be the best way given what openser can
do right now (1.3) to re-write that header that doesn't break
anything. I'm not adverse to writing some code to make it happen if
that is what is needed.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Phil
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)lists.openser.org
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users