11 Nov
2004
11 Nov
'04
4:59 p.m.
Hi,
Ser is pretty new to me (about 3 weeks of reading about it and working with
it), so naturally I have some questions: (attached - the configuration file
I use)
I saw many examples of configuration files were both SL and TM modules are
loaded.
In such cases is SL loaded only for REGISTER requests?
How can I control which of SER actions are handled with TM and which are
handled with SL?
Is there a way of hooking SER answers to requests without TM?
As I understand from this mail archive - INVITE is a special case in SER and
even though the client doesn't retramit such requests, SER does. Is there a
way to avoid this retransmission? Is there a way to control the interval
time between one retransmission to another?
It seems that sometimes these retransmissions occure even after the ACK is
returned...
Another starnge this is that my clients are on the same domain as the one
SER is on and still record_route() seems to add many non usefull header
lines for such INVITE messages.
Is it a problem with my configuration file?
Thanks in advance,
Micky
_________________________________________________________________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.com/
12 Nov
12 Nov
11:17 a.m.
On Nov 11, 2004 at 16:59, Michael Kaufmann <mkaufmannn(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
Ser is pretty new to me (about 3 weeks of reading about it and working with
it), so naturally I have some questions: (attached - the configuration
file I use)
I saw many examples of configuration files were both SL and TM modules are
loaded.
In such cases is SL loaded only for REGISTER requests?
sl is loaded for stateless replies. If you want to send only an error
reply and you haven't called any tm functions (t_newtran, t_rely) and
you are not in a failure route, it's faster to use sl_send_reply (it
doesn't make sense to keep state in this case).
How can I control which of SER actions are handled
with TM and which are
handled with SL?
sl handles only stateless replies. If you want to send a request
statelessly use forward(uri:host, uri:port).
If you use t_relay instead of forward than you use tm.
Is there a way of hooking SER answers to requests
without TM?
No.
As I understand from this mail archive - INVITE is a special case in SER
and even though the client doesn't retramit such requests, SER does. Is
there a way to avoid this retransmission? Is there a way to control the
interval time between one retransmission to another?
In statefull mode (TM), ser retransmits the request on behalf of the
client. THe retransmission stops when a reply is received or after some
timeout. The time between retransmissions is not constant, it increases.
See the sip rfc for more details (rfc3261).
It seems that sometimes these retransmissions occure even after the ACK is
returned...
The INVITE retransmissions stops when a reply to it comes.
ACKs "control" the replies retransmissions. ACKs to INVITE positive
replies are handled a little differently than ACKs to negative replies.
You might have a non-matching ACK, or the ACK might not reach the
desired target.
Another starnge this is that my clients are on the
same domain as the one
SER is on and still record_route() seems to add many non usefull header
lines for such INVITE messages.
If you don't need record routing then don't use it.
Is it a problem with my configuration file?
Andrei
7315
days inactive
7316
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul -
Michael Kaufmann