Is there a problem with calling a route block from within a failure_route rather than doing a t_relay()?
I have noticed that if I add xlog NOTICEs to my failure routes and
route[7] (which gets called from failure_route), calls hit the failure
route once, but hit the route[7] block twice (once for the alias and
once for the subscriber ID) . Is this a BUG?
On 7/18/05, Daniel Poulsen <dpoulsen@gmail.com> wrote:
I think I am missing something very simple here, but I cannot figure out what it is.
I have DID aliases set up for SER usernames, so when a call comes in as
2125551234, I do a lookup("aliases") which results in something like
username1@sip.mydomain.com. Username1 is the registered SER
user. the numbers are all aliases.
I also have a secondary aliases table called "hunt" which I use to
store call hunt sequences. The problem is that if a user
does not pick up the phone and SER calls failure_route[1], I get a hunt
for both 2125551234 and username1. Shouldn't my revert_uri() in
failure_route cause the hunt lookup to be done on 2125551234 only?
route[7] is called from failure_route only, so there isn't any
other logic that might put me into these route blocks. Included
below the call routing blocks are some syslogs.
If anyone could offer a suggestion or has seen anything like this and
could let me know what they did to solve it I would be eternally
grateful.
Thank you.
Dan
###
# Hunt (8), but only on 404/408/486
route[7] {
if (t_check_status("408") | # Timeout
t_check_status("404") | # Not found
t_check_status("486")) # Busy
{
route(8);
} else {
xlog("L_NOTICE",
"%ci: r7: hunt but not 404/408/486\n");
};
}
###
# Hunt to the next number in sequence
route[8] {
# See if we're in a hunt
if(search("P-hint: pt-hunt")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE",
"wanted to hunt, but hunt already in progress\n");
break;
};
# Assumes URI has been revert and prefixed with "h#-"
# Also assumes t_on_failure (#+1) has been set.
xlog("L_NOTICE", "%ci: r8: hunt on %ru\n");
if(lookup("hunt")) {
xlog("L_NOTICE",
"%ci: r8: hunt changed URI to %ru, relaying\n");
append_branch();
append_hf("P-hint: pt-hunt\r\n");
setflag(9);
t_relay();
break;
} else {
xlog("L_NOTICE",
"%ci: r8: no further hunts, giving up\n");
};
}
failure_route[1] { revert_uri(); prefix("h1-"); t_on_failure("2"); route(7); }
failure_route[2] { revert_uri(); prefix("h2-"); t_on_failure("3"); route(7); }
failure_route[3] { revert_uri(); prefix("h3-"); t_on_failure("4"); route(7); }
failure_route[4] { revert_uri(); prefix("h4-"); t_on_failure("5"); route(7); }
failure_route[5] { revert_uri(); prefix("h5-"); t_on_failure("6"); route(7); }
failure_route[6] { revert_uri(); prefix("h6-"); t_on_failure("7"); route(7); }
failure_route[7] { revert_uri(); prefix("h7-"); t_on_failure("8"); route(7); }
failure_route[8] { revert_uri(); prefix("h8-"); t_on_failure("9"); route(7); }
failure_route[9] { xlog("L_ERR", "too many hunts!\n"); }
Jul 18 11:17:23 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18279]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.18]
INVITE sip:2125551234@192.168.32.30:5060
Jul 18 11:17:23 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18279]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: alias lookup changed
uri to sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:17:23 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18279]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.30]
INVITE sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:17:53 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18301]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: r8: hunt on
sip:h1-username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:17:53 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18301]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: r8: hunt changed URI
to sip:2125551234@vm.packetalk.net, relaying
Jul 18 11:17:53 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18301]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: r8: hunt on
sip:h1-2125551234@192.168.32.30:5060
Jul 18 11:17:53 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18301]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: r8: hunt changed URI
to sip:2125551234@vm.packetalk.net, relaying
Jul 18 11:17:53 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18281]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.30]
CANCEL sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:17:55 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18295]: ERROR: t_should_relay_response: status rewrite by UAS: stored: 408, received: 200
Jul 18 11:17:56 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18285]: ERROR: t_should_relay_response: status rewrite by UAS: stored: 408, received: 200
Jul 18 11:17:57 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18295]: ERROR: t_should_relay_response: status rewrite by UAS: stored: 408, received: 200
Jul 18 11:17:58 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18289]: ERROR: t_should_relay_response: status rewrite by UAS: stored: 408, received: 200
Jul 18 11:17:59 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18298]: ERROR: t_should_relay_response: status rewrite by UAS: stored: 408, received: 200
Jul 18 11:18:00 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18281]: ERROR: t_should_relay_response: status rewrite by UAS: stored: 408, received: 200
Jul 18 11:18:08 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18280]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.18]
CANCEL sip:2125551234@192.168.32.30:5060
Jul 18 11:18:08 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18280]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: alias lookup changed
uri to sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:18:08 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18289]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.30] ACK
sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:18:09 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18285]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.30] ACK
sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:18:10 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18289]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.30] ACK
sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:18:11 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18298]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.30] ACK
sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:18:12 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18298]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.30] ACK
sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com
Jul 18 11:18:13 sip /usr/sbin/ser[18287]:
29FF0A3-F6D611D9-938FBF07-9CC1DBD7@192.168.32.18: [
192.168.32.30] ACK
sip:username1@sip.mydomain.com