21 Dec
2007
21 Dec
'07
3:29 p.m.
Hi,
I have following issue.
All my outgoing requests are forwarded through boundary proxy
by setting the destination before t_relay()
my problem is when there is another branch created.
This second branch is routed in the standard SIP way
directly to destination in request URI.
How can I force also branches to go through my
boundary proxy.
Can I somehow check in branch_route that this branch is not the first one
(not first message)
but the second and and change the destination and make t_relay()?
Thank You for any feedback
Regards
Tomasz
21 Dec
21 Dec
5:34 p.m.
Hi,
you can try to use patch available here:
http://tracker.iptel.org/browse/SER-213
Unfortunately it did not move into the main tree yet (and might be
little bit outdated at the moment).
attr_destination and xlset_destination are available in the branch route
and branch value is available using @tm.xxx select I think.
Michal
On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 14:29 +0100, Tomasz Zieleniewski wrote:
Hi,
I have following issue.
All my outgoing requests are forwarded through boundary proxy
by setting the destination before t_relay()
my problem is when there is another branch created.
This second branch is routed in the standard SIP way
directly to destination in request URI.
How can I force also branches to go through my
boundary proxy.
Can I somehow check in branch_route that this branch is not the first
one (not first message)
but the second and and change the destination and make t_relay()?
Thank You for any feedback
Regards
Tomasz
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
22 Dec
22 Dec
4:53 p.m.
Hi Michal,
Unfortunately attr_destination and xlset_destination are not allow in the
branch route.
When one can expect the patch and those functions to be available in main
tree??
Tomasz
On Dec 21, 2007 4:34 PM, Michal Matyska <michal(a)iptel.org> wrote:
Hi,
you can try to use patch available here:
http://tracker.iptel.org/browse/SER-213
Unfortunately it did not move into the main tree yet (and might be
little bit outdated at the moment).
attr_destination and xlset_destination are available in the branch route
and branch value is available using @tm.xxx select I think.
Michal
On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 14:29 +0100, Tomasz Zieleniewski wrote:
Hi,
I have following issue.
All my outgoing requests are forwarded through boundary proxy
by setting the destination before t_relay()
my problem is when there is another branch created.
This second branch is routed in the standard SIP way
directly to destination in request URI.
How can I force also branches to go through my
boundary proxy.
Can I somehow check in branch_route that this branch is not the first
one (not first message)
but the second and and change the destination and make t_relay()?
Thank You for any feedback
Regards
Tomasz
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
9:22 p.m.
Yes,
you have to change it by yourself or apply the second patch attached in
the tracker.
Michal
On So, 2007-12-22 at 15:53 +0100, Tomasz Zieleniewski wrote:
Hi Michal,
Unfortunately attr_destination and xlset_destination are not allow in
the branch route.
When one can expect the patch and those functions to be available in
main tree??
Tomasz
On Dec 21, 2007 4:34 PM, Michal Matyska <michal(a)iptel.org> wrote:
Hi,
you can try to use patch available here:
http://tracker.iptel.org/browse/SER-213
Unfortunately it did not move into the main tree yet (and
might be
little bit outdated at the moment).
attr_destination and xlset_destination are available in the
branch route
and branch value is available using @tm.xxx select I think.
Michal
On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 14:29 +0100, Tomasz Zieleniewski wrote:
Hi,
I have following issue.
All my outgoing requests are forwarded through boundary
proxy
by setting the destination before t_relay()
my problem is when there is another branch created.
This second branch is routed in the standard SIP way
directly to destination in request URI.
How can I force also branches to go through my
boundary proxy.
Can I somehow check in branch_route that this branch is not
the first
one (not first message)
but the second and and change the destination and make
t_relay()?
Thank You for any feedback
Regards
Tomasz
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
11:17 p.m.
What about such behavior that every branch would use the same destination as
the first one used?
Would it brake SIP RFC?
On Dec 22, 2007 8:22 PM, Michal Matyska <michal(a)iptel.org> wrote:
Yes,
you have to change it by yourself or apply the second patch attached in
the tracker.
Michal
On So, 2007-12-22 at 15:53 +0100, Tomasz Zieleniewski wrote:
Hi Michal,
Unfortunately attr_destination and xlset_destination are not allow in
the branch route.
When one can expect the patch and those functions to be available in
main tree??
Tomasz
On Dec 21, 2007 4:34 PM, Michal Matyska <michal(a)iptel.org> wrote:
Hi,
you can try to use patch available here:
http://tracker.iptel.org/browse/SER-213
Unfortunately it did not move into the main tree yet (and
might be
little bit outdated at the moment).
attr_destination and xlset_destination are available in the
branch route
and branch value is available using @tm.xxx select I think.
Michal
On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 14:29 +0100, Tomasz Zieleniewski wrote:
Hi,
I have following issue.
All my outgoing requests are forwarded through boundary
proxy
by setting the destination before t_relay()
my problem is when there is another branch created.
This second branch is routed in the standard SIP way
directly to destination in request URI.
How can I force also branches to go through my
boundary proxy.
Can I somehow check in branch_route that this branch is not
the first
one (not first message)
but the second and and change the destination and make
t_relay()?
Thank You for any feedback
Regards
Tomasz
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
6187
days inactive
6188
days old
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Michal Matyska -
Tomasz Zieleniewski