On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:52 AM, mayamatakeshi<[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 7:31 AM, Tihomir Culjaga<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> sipp_cmd: sipp -sn uac 10.4.4.251 -sf uac_redirect.xml -s >> 30003016094191500 -trace_err -r 1 -rp 1000 -trace_msg -inf test.txt -m 1 -l >> 4000 >> scenario file: uac_redirect.xml >> FS dialplan: public.xml >> SIP trace: trace.log > > The Via definition in your SIPp scenario differs between the INVITE and the > ACK: > > INVITE: > Via: SIP/2.0/[transport] [local_ip];branch=[branch] > > ACK: > Via: SIP/2.0/[transport] [local_ip]:[local_port];branch=[branch-3] > > > In the INVITE, you are not adding the [local_port] as you do in the ACK. > Just adding the [local_port] in the INVITE makes FreeSWITCH accept the ACK. > So it seems FS is not checking just the ACK's branch against the > INVITE's; it seems it is checking the whole Via header. > I don't know if this is in accordance to SIP specs. > Another thing, about the way you are calling SIPp: do no use "-sn uac" > and "-sf uac_redirect.xml" at the same time. The parameter "-sn xxx" > means "use the internal (embedded) scenario named xxx". So this > conflicts with the other parameter "-sf" which specifies an external > profile.
I mean, an external scenario (file). It seems this doesn't cause any problem (probably because in > the sipp startup, -sf overrides -sn), but it is misleading. > > regards, > takeshi > _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org
