Hi,
What is the intended behaviour from a general point of view if you get a 1xx on one branch and a 30x on another branch for a parallel fork?
From my understanding, the 30x is a final reply, so it's kept in tm
until all other branches are finished, then it enters failure-route with the highest error code (e.g. a 487 if you cancel the other branch).
What I actually want is intercepting the 30x and send another INVITE to the Contact of the 30x in the failure route. This works fine if you only have one branch, but it doesn't enter failure route for 30x if you have another active branch (e.g. in ringing state). Would it be possible to create a new branch directly from the reply route, or force to enter failure route for a specific reply/branch?
Andreas
Hello,
starting with 4.1, you can have per branch failure routing block:
http://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/tm.html#tm.f.t_on_branch_...
Cheers, Daniel
On 18/02/14 10:28, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hi,
What is the intended behaviour from a general point of view if you get a 1xx on one branch and a 30x on another branch for a parallel fork?
From my understanding, the 30x is a final reply, so it's kept in tm until all other branches are finished, then it enters failure-route with the highest error code (e.g. a 487 if you cancel the other branch).
What I actually want is intercepting the 30x and send another INVITE to the Contact of the 30x in the failure route. This works fine if you only have one branch, but it doesn't enter failure route for 30x if you have another active branch (e.g. in ringing state). Would it be possible to create a new branch directly from the reply route, or force to enter failure route for a specific reply/branch?
Andreas
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Hi Daniel,
On 02/18/2014 10:38 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
starting with 4.1, you can have per branch failure routing block:
http://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/tm.html#tm.f.t_on_branch_...
Ha, we'll check if this is going to work for us, sounds good, thanks! Just for clarification: the "normal" failure route will still be executed after all branches are ended, right?
Andreas
Daniel,
we do seem to have a problem here, the get_redirects() function can be used from the FAILURE_ROUTE only, not from per branch failure route ("Command cannot be used in the block"). Does it mean that uac_redirect module needs an update?
Andrew
On 02/18/2014 10:38 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
starting with 4.1, you can have per branch failure routing block:
http://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/tm.html#tm.f.t_on_branch_...
Cheers, Daniel
On 18/02/14 10:28, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hi,
What is the intended behaviour from a general point of view if you get a 1xx on one branch and a 30x on another branch for a parallel fork?
From my understanding, the 30x is a final reply, so it's kept in tm until all other branches are finished, then it enters failure-route with the highest error code (e.g. a 487 if you cancel the other branch).
What I actually want is intercepting the 30x and send another INVITE to the Contact of the 30x in the failure route. This works fine if you only have one branch, but it doesn't enter failure route for 30x if you have another active branch (e.g. in ringing state). Would it be possible to create a new branch directly from the reply route, or force to enter failure route for a specific reply/branch?
Andreas
In the meantime it works if I access $T_rpl($ct) from per-branch failure route.
Thanks.
On 02/20/2014 02:14 PM, Andrew Pogrebennyk wrote:
Daniel,
we do seem to have a problem here, the get_redirects() function can be used from the FAILURE_ROUTE only, not from per branch failure route ("Command cannot be used in the block"). Does it mean that uac_redirect module needs an update?
Andrew
On 02/18/2014 10:38 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
starting with 4.1, you can have per branch failure routing block:
http://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/tm.html#tm.f.t_on_branch_...
Cheers, Daniel
On 18/02/14 10:28, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hi,
What is the intended behaviour from a general point of view if you get a 1xx on one branch and a 30x on another branch for a parallel fork?
From my understanding, the 30x is a final reply, so it's kept in tm until all other branches are finished, then it enters failure-route with the highest error code (e.g. a 487 if you cancel the other branch).
What I actually want is intercepting the 30x and send another INVITE to the Contact of the 30x in the failure route. This works fine if you only have one branch, but it doesn't enter failure route for 30x if you have another active branch (e.g. in ringing state). Would it be possible to create a new branch directly from the reply route, or force to enter failure route for a specific reply/branch?
Andreas
You can test to see if get_redirects() works ok in branch failure route and if yes, then make a patch for it and will be added.
Cheers, Daniel
On 21/02/14 10:59, Andrew Pogrebennyk wrote:
In the meantime it works if I access $T_rpl($ct) from per-branch failure route.
Thanks.
On 02/20/2014 02:14 PM, Andrew Pogrebennyk wrote:
Daniel,
we do seem to have a problem here, the get_redirects() function can be used from the FAILURE_ROUTE only, not from per branch failure route ("Command cannot be used in the block"). Does it mean that uac_redirect module needs an update?
Andrew
On 02/18/2014 10:38 AM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
starting with 4.1, you can have per branch failure routing block:
http://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/tm.html#tm.f.t_on_branch_...
Cheers, Daniel
On 18/02/14 10:28, Andreas Granig wrote:
Hi,
What is the intended behaviour from a general point of view if you get a 1xx on one branch and a 30x on another branch for a parallel fork?
From my understanding, the 30x is a final reply, so it's kept in tm until all other branches are finished, then it enters failure-route with the highest error code (e.g. a 487 if you cancel the other branch).
What I actually want is intercepting the 30x and send another INVITE to the Contact of the 30x in the failure route. This works fine if you only have one branch, but it doesn't enter failure route for 30x if you have another active branch (e.g. in ringing state). Would it be possible to create a new branch directly from the reply route, or force to enter failure route for a specific reply/branch?
Andreas
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
-
Andreas Granig -
Andrew Pogrebennyk -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla