Hi all.
Does anyone know if the loose_route() function returns FALSE for REGISTER messages that erroneously happen to contain Route headers?
In other words, do I have to do this:
route {
# sanity checks
if (method!="REGISTER") record_route();
if (loose_route() && method!="REGISTER") { <-------Is This Necessary??? # handle loose routing break; }
# Normal processing }
Regards, Paul
Hi!
I depends an what you want to achieve! REGISTERs with route headers are possible (sending the REGISTER via an outboundproxy using a pre-set route).
If the proxy acts as "normal" proxy (REGISTER for local users will be processed local; relaying not allowed) then you can catch the REIGSTER messages on top of ser.cfg and process them.
If the proxy acts an outbound proxy which relays the REGISTER you can use loose_route().
regards, klaus
Java Rockx wrote:
Hi all.
Does anyone know if the loose_route() function returns FALSE for REGISTER messages that erroneously happen to contain Route headers?
In other words, do I have to do this:
route {
# sanity checks
if (method!="REGISTER") record_route();
if (loose_route() && method!="REGISTER") { <-------Is This Necessary??? # handle loose routing break; }
# Normal processing }
Regards, Paul
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
No, there is no special case for REGISTER messages in loose_route. If you want to ignore Route header fields in REGISTER messages then do not call loose_route function.
Jan.
On 03-03 10:07, Java Rockx wrote:
Hi all.
Does anyone know if the loose_route() function returns FALSE for REGISTER messages that erroneously happen to contain Route headers?
In other words, do I have to do this:
route {
# sanity checks
if (method!="REGISTER") record_route();
if (loose_route() && method!="REGISTER") { <-------Is This Necessary??? # handle loose routing break; }
# Normal processing }
Regards, Paul
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers