Hello,
I made a ngrep and I noticed that NO "487 Request Cancelled" is reaching my ser on CANCEL. That could be the problem.
I also tried to use the avpops module:
if (method == "CANCEL") { setflag(1); avp_write("cancel", "s:failover"); log(1, "-CANCEL PSTN-\n"); };
...and then with avp_check in the failover route. Without result. Could it be that the variables in the avp don't reach another route?
Thanks for your help
Sebastian
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bayan William Towfiq" william@telepacket.com To: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 3:39 PM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
Hi Sebastian, Sorry about that, I misread the code. I will test your code and dig up an example of how I do it in my failure routes to show you.
William
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
Hi William,
Thanks for your help.
In my failover route I have the following code:
failure_route[2] { if (t_check_status("408|500|503")) { log (1, "next gateway...\n"); if (!next_gw()) { t_reply("503", "Service not available, no more gateways"); break; } log (1, "gateway changed...\n"); t_on_failure("2"); t_relay(); } }
So the status is already filtered. I tried your code but without
result...
Does anybody know how I can stop the failover timer?
Thanks!
Sebastian
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bayan William Towfiq" william@telepacket.com To: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 1:28 AM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
Hi Sebastian, If the message is a cancel you it will have status 487
so you can just add
if (t_check_status("487")) { break; };before the rest of the code in the failure route. You can mail me privately if you have any more questions about this issue.
William
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
Hello,
I'm using ser to forward to PSTN Gatways.
Before the t_relay I put the command:
t_on_failure("2");
So, after a timeout ser goes to:
failure_route[2] { log (1, "next gateway...\n"); if (t_check_status("408|500|503")) { if (!next_gw()) { t_reply("503", "Service not available, no more gateways"); break; } log (1, "gateway changed...\n"); } t_on_failure("2"); t_relay(); }
This is working very good... if the user doesn't make a hangup.
If caller hangs up, the CANCEL hits SER and the call is cleanly
terminated.
SER however continues to failure_route after timeout of the initial INVITE... ser sends out a new INVITE message to another PSTN-Server...
and
the phone rings (with nobody in the line)
Many thanks for your help!
Sebastian
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Hi!
Here is a ngrep of my cancel message:
U 2005/08/19 09:45:46.747447 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1024 -> xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060 CANCEL sip:0054261xxxxxxxx@pbx2.test.com:5060 SIP/2.0. Content-Length: 0. Call-ID: 2E863532-7483-4585-B9FA-C6EC3340203B@192.168.1.101. Max-Forwards: 70. From: "Administrator"sip:44441@pbx2.test.com:5060;tag=257139028539. CSeq: 1 CANCEL. To: sip:0054261xxxxxxx@pbx2.test.com:5060. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1024;rport;branch=z9hG4bKc0a801650131c9b14305d51d00002639000 000b4. User-Agent: SJLabs-SJphone/1.30.252. .
# U 2005/08/19 09:45:46.997466 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060 -> xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1024 SIP/2.0 200 ok -- no more pending branches. Call-ID: 2E863532-7483-4585-B9FA-C6EC3340203B@192.168.1.101. From: "Administrator"sip:44441@pbx2.test.com:5060;tag=257139028539. CSeq: 1 CANCEL. To: sip:0054261xxxxxxx@pbx2.test.com:5060;tag=2fb8a6135db5d855a493c61ec9633675 -1e47. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1024;rport=1024;branch=z9hG4bKc0a801650131c9b14305d51d000026 39000000b4. Server: Sip EXpress router (0.9.3 (i386/linux)). Content-Length: 0. Warning: 392 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=31972 req_src_ip=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx req_src_port=1024 in_uri=sip:00542 .
Shouldn't that be 486 Request Terminated instead of 200 ok?
Thanks!
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com To: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 10:01 AM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
Hello,
I made a ngrep and I noticed that NO "487 Request Cancelled" is reaching
my
ser on CANCEL. That could be the problem.
I also tried to use the avpops module:
if (method == "CANCEL") { setflag(1); avp_write("cancel", "s:failover"); log(1, "-CANCEL PSTN-\n"); };
...and then with avp_check in the failover route. Without result. Could it be that the variables in the avp don't reach another route?
Thanks for your help
Sebastian
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bayan William Towfiq" william@telepacket.com To: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 3:39 PM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
Hi Sebastian, Sorry about that, I misread the code. I will test your code and dig up an example of how I do it in my failure routes to show you.
William
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
Hi William,
Thanks for your help.
In my failover route I have the following code:
failure_route[2] { if (t_check_status("408|500|503")) { log (1, "next gateway...\n"); if (!next_gw()) { t_reply("503", "Service not available, no more gateways"); break; } log (1, "gateway changed...\n"); t_on_failure("2"); t_relay(); } }
So the status is already filtered. I tried your code but without
result...
Does anybody know how I can stop the failover timer?
Thanks!
Sebastian
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bayan William Towfiq" william@telepacket.com To: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 1:28 AM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
Hi Sebastian, If the message is a cancel you it will have status 487
so you can just add
if (t_check_status("487")) { break; };before the rest of the code in the failure route. You can mail me privately if you have any more questions about this issue.
William
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
Hello,
I'm using ser to forward to PSTN Gatways.
Before the t_relay I put the command:
t_on_failure("2");
So, after a timeout ser goes to:
failure_route[2] { log (1, "next gateway...\n"); if (t_check_status("408|500|503")) { if (!next_gw()) { t_reply("503", "Service not available, no more gateways"); break; } log (1, "gateway changed...\n"); } t_on_failure("2"); t_relay(); }
This is working very good... if the user doesn't make a hangup.
If caller hangs up, the CANCEL hits SER and the call is cleanly
terminated.
SER however continues to failure_route after timeout of the initial INVITE... ser sends out a new INVITE message to another
PSTN-Server...
and
the phone rings (with nobody in the line)
Many thanks for your help!
Sebastian
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
why, I think CANCEL will return a 200 OK, according to RFC,
Iqbal
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
Hi!
Here is a ngrep of my cancel message:
U 2005/08/19 09:45:46.747447 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1024 -> xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060 CANCEL sip:0054261xxxxxxxx@pbx2.test.com:5060 SIP/2.0. Content-Length: 0. Call-ID: 2E863532-7483-4585-B9FA-C6EC3340203B@192.168.1.101. Max-Forwards: 70. From: "Administrator"sip:44441@pbx2.test.com:5060;tag=257139028539. CSeq: 1 CANCEL. To: sip:0054261xxxxxxx@pbx2.test.com:5060. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1024;rport;branch=z9hG4bKc0a801650131c9b14305d51d00002639000 000b4. User-Agent: SJLabs-SJphone/1.30.252. .
# U 2005/08/19 09:45:46.997466 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060 -> xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1024 SIP/2.0 200 ok -- no more pending branches. Call-ID: 2E863532-7483-4585-B9FA-C6EC3340203B@192.168.1.101. From: "Administrator"sip:44441@pbx2.test.com:5060;tag=257139028539. CSeq: 1 CANCEL. To: sip:0054261xxxxxxx@pbx2.test.com:5060;tag=2fb8a6135db5d855a493c61ec9633675 -1e47. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1024;rport=1024;branch=z9hG4bKc0a801650131c9b14305d51d000026 39000000b4. Server: Sip EXpress router (0.9.3 (i386/linux)). Content-Length: 0. Warning: 392 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=31972 req_src_ip=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx req_src_port=1024 in_uri=sip:00542 .
Shouldn't that be 486 Request Terminated instead of 200 ok?
Thanks!
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com To: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 10:01 AM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
Hello,
I made a ngrep and I noticed that NO "487 Request Cancelled" is reaching
my
ser on CANCEL. That could be the problem.
I also tried to use the avpops module:
if (method == "CANCEL") { setflag(1); avp_write("cancel", "s:failover"); log(1, "-CANCEL PSTN-\n"); };
...and then with avp_check in the failover route. Without result. Could it be that the variables in the avp don't reach another route?
Thanks for your help
Sebastian
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bayan William Towfiq" william@telepacket.com To: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 3:39 PM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
Hi Sebastian, Sorry about that, I misread the code. I will test your code and dig up an example of how I do it in my failure routes to show you.
William
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
Hi William,
Thanks for your help.
In my failover route I have the following code:
failure_route[2] { if (t_check_status("408|500|503")) { log (1, "next gateway...\n"); if (!next_gw()) { t_reply("503", "Service not available, no more gateways"); break; } log (1, "gateway changed...\n"); t_on_failure("2"); t_relay(); } }
So the status is already filtered. I tried your code but without
result...
Does anybody know how I can stop the failover timer?
Thanks!
Sebastian
----- Original Message ----- From: "Bayan William Towfiq" william@telepacket.com To: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 1:28 AM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
Hi Sebastian, If the message is a cancel you it will have status 487
so you can just add
if (t_check_status("487")) { break; };before the rest of the code in the failure route. You can mail me privately if you have any more questions about this issue.
William
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
Hello,
I'm using ser to forward to PSTN Gatways.
Before the t_relay I put the command:
t_on_failure("2");
So, after a timeout ser goes to:
failure_route[2] { log (1, "next gateway...\n"); if (t_check_status("408|500|503")) { if (!next_gw()) { t_reply("503", "Service not available, no more gateways"); break; } log (1, "gateway changed...\n"); } t_on_failure("2"); t_relay(); }
This is working very good... if the user doesn't make a hangup.
If caller hangs up, the CANCEL hits SER and the call is cleanly
terminated.
SER however continues to failure_route after timeout of the initial INVITE... ser sends out a new INVITE message to another
PSTN-Server...
and
the phone rings (with nobody in the line)
Many thanks for your help!
Sebastian
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
.
If the response of CANCEL is OK, why does the request 487 Request Terminated exist then?
Well, I think one more day on this and I will rewrite ser to save time...
The main problem is that ser goes into the failover route (on timeout), although I've canceled the call...
I stand corrected, I just checked you should get a 487
Iqbal
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
If the response of CANCEL is OK, why does the request 487 Request Terminated exist then?
Well, I think one more day on this and I will rewrite ser to save time...
The main problem is that ser goes into the failover route (on timeout), although I've canceled the call...
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
.
OK, many thanks!
The only question that I have now is why my ser doesn't make that...
----- Original Message ----- From: "Iqbal" iqbal@gigo.co.uk To: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 2:49 PM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
I stand corrected, I just checked you should get a 487
Iqbal
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
If the response of CANCEL is OK, why does the request 487 Request
Terminated
exist then?
Well, I think one more day on this and I will rewrite ser to save time...
The main problem is that ser goes into the failover route (on timeout), although I've canceled the call...
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
.
OK, I'm a little bit nearer to my problem.
Normally, the callee sends back the 487 message... and that hits (and kills!) the failover.
But I'm sending the INVITE message to a host that isn't reachable (because I'm testing failover)... so nobody can send me back this message and the failover gets after some seconds the timeout... well, I need that timeout, too.
Is there any other way to stop the timer?
Thanks!
----- Original Message ----- From: "Iqbal" iqbal@gigo.co.uk To: "Sebastian Kühner" skuehner@veraza.com Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Sent: Friday, August 19, 2005 2:49 PM Subject: Re: [Serusers] cancal
I stand corrected, I just checked you should get a 487
Iqbal
Sebastian Kühner wrote:
If the response of CANCEL is OK, why does the request 487 Request
Terminated
exist then?
Well, I think one more day on this and I will rewrite ser to save time...
The main problem is that ser goes into the failover route (on timeout), although I've canceled the call...
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
.
-
Iqbal -
Sebastian Kühner