Well, in this case you need to test for the status code in the failure route. If you fork off several INVITEs in your main route, you don't get into the failure route until all branches failed. So, I still don't understand how you do it.
Anyway, you want to avoid it, because you have a gateway that does not follow the RFC...
g-)

Zappasodi Daniele wrote:
R: [Serusers] sequential forking and merged request

I have written a module that choose the next client reading the destination from a db, but I can easily obtain the same scenario with the basic serial forking example:

 route{
        [...]
       t_on_failure("1");
       t_relay();
 }

 failure_route[1] {
       append_branch("sip:number1@mygw.com");
       log(1,"first redirection\n");
       t_on_failure("2");
       t_relay();
 }

 failure_route[2] {
       append_branch("sip:number2@mygw.com");
       log(1, "second redirection to the same gateway, but different number\n");
       t_relay();
 }



-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Greger V. Teigre [mailto:greger@teigre.com]
Inviato: lun 07/05/2007 15.48
A: Zappasodi Daniele
Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org
Oggetto: Re: [Serusers] sequential forking and merged request

Any device implementing UA functionality should follow RFC3261. But I'm
not sure how you manage to fork off two INVITEs to the same gateway? I
would start there.
g-)

Zappasodi Daniele wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a question about sequential forking and Merged Request.
> If in a forking SER calls two lines of the same client (different numbers and different Request-URIs) it refuses the second call with 482 (Cisco and Snom multiline phone for example) according with RFC 3261 section 8.2.2.2 because the two INVITEs have the same Call-Id, From tag and Cseq.
> If this behaviour is reasonable with a phone, it could not be acceptable for other types of client, first of all SIP-PSTN gateway.
> Is it correct this RFC interpretation? Maybe is this section inappropriate for gateways? 
> Is there something that I can do in the config file?
>
>
> **********************************************************************
> The information in this message is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message
> by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any
> disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or
> omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
> Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message inerror.
>
> **********************************************************************
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers@lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>  

 

**********************************************************************
The information in this message is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message
by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any
disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or
omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message inerror.

**********************************************************************