Hello,
look at:
http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules/tm.html#tm.p.cancel_b_method
Maybe one or another value for that parameter is suiting better your use case.
Thank you for the suggestion.
This looked promising, but the cancel_b_method parameter is already at the default value of one. I also tried changing the value to two and got a similar result.
This may sound crazy, but it almost seems like the problem happens only when kamailio is processing unrelated INVITES at the same time.
Hello,
maybe you can reproduce the same situation using tcp and grab a network trace (ngrep with at least -t) for such a call to see what woould be the difference of time between those packets. Maybe the transaction is already destroyed.
Cheers, Daniel
On 09/10/15 16:22, John Billings wrote:
Hello,
look at:
http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules/tm.html#tm.p.cancel_b_method
Maybe one or another value for that parameter is suiting better your use case.
Thank you for the suggestion.
This looked promising, but the cancel_b_method parameter is already at the default value of one. I also tried changing the value to two and got a similar result.
This may sound crazy, but it almost seems like the problem happens only when kamailio is processing unrelated INVITES at the same time. _______________________________________________ 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