Re: [Serusers] How SER communicate to other SIP server - sr-users

3 Jul 2007

      Hi, Olaf!
Oops, I accidentally deleted the semi-colon(;) at the closing of the IF
statement. I know that the SIP messages are routed according to the URI and
that's the reason why I need to change the URI (of the TO header). But I
just failed to change the uri at the TO header. Therefore, it couldn't route
to another SIP server.
Current FROM/TO uri that I get,
    From 	: sip:12345@mySER.net:5060
    To	: sip:88888888@anotherSIP.net:5060
The actual FROM/TO uri that I WANT will be,
    From 	: sip:12345@mySER.net:5060
    To	: sip:88888888@anotherSIP.net:5060
I've checked on the regular expression, and it's fine with that. Am I using
the correct function - rewritehostport()?
Thanks.
Best regards,
Roa Yu
-----Original Message-----
From: Olaf Bergmann [mailto:Olaf.Bergmann@freenet-ag.de] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 3:07 PM
To: roayu
Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] How SER communicate to other SIP server
roayu wrote:
...
Hi, Olaf!
I've used 'rewritehostport("sipB.net:5060")' under the INVITE message
handler.
The following are my configuration, pls correct me if I'm wrong.
   if(uri =~ "^sip:[0-9{8}@.*") {
   	if(!proxy_authorise("","subscriber")){
   		proxy_challenge("","0");
   		break;
}else if(!check_from()) {
	sl_send_reply("403","Use From ID");
	break;
};

consume_credentials();
   	rewritehostport("sipB.net:5060");
   	setflag(1);
   	route(1);
   	break;
   }
When I dialed 8-digit of the number, it will pass to another SIP
server(sipB.net). But on the TO header, I still found that the TO address
still under the sipSER.net. You may refer to the following.
   From 	: sip:12345@sipSER.net:5060
   To	: sip:88888888@sipSER.net:5060
Does that means that it's still looping inside sipSER.net instead of
routing
...
to sipB.net? If yes, how do I change the TO header or make it route to
sipB.net?
No, SIP messages are routed according to their request URI. I am not
sure if the regular expression in your if-clause was corrupted by
the E-Mail service (if not, at least a closing bracket is missing).
I suggest, you start with a simplified version of this regexp to be
sure that the then-part is evaluated at all. Use xlog() to add a
couple of debug messages to find out which routing blocks are evaluated.
Regards,
Olaf