2010/6/18 Henning Westerholt henning.westerh...@1und1.de:
Does t_relay() manage both the client and server transactions for the
packet being forwarded ? Meaning it would absorb retransmissions it
receives and would retransmit the relayed message when needed ?
this is my understanding of the
2010/6/18 David kamailio@spam.lublink.net:
With regards to the thread Re: [SR-Users] CANCEL before INVITE. I added a
t_newtran(); call after t_checktrans() and before t_relay(), this prevented
t_relay() from sending a 100 Trying to the calling user. Why would the
functionality of t_relay()
Iñaki,
On 06/21/2010 03:35 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
But from the server/proxy point of view it doesn't matter. This is, if
the proxy has received an INVITE it doesn't matter if it has replied a
provisional response or not, it already *can* handle a CANCEL from the
client. The only
Hi,
Have you tried this?
On 05/27/2010 10:15 AM, Elena-Ramona Modroiu wrote:
Note as well that in some OSes, connecting to openser database from
127.0.0.1 is not same as localhost (which is used by kamctl to create
openser user and database), so try with localhost instead of 127.0.0.1
2010/6/21 Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.com:
Iñaki,
On 06/21/2010 03:35 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
But from the server/proxy point of view it doesn't matter. This is, if
the proxy has received an INVITE it doesn't matter if it has replied a
provisional response or not, it already
2010/6/21 Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.com:
Thank you for the clarification.
This is what I thought, but I wondered because philosophically it seems to
slightly conflict with the requirement that the proxy - even a stateful
proxy - forward what it receives more or less
On 06/21/2010 04:07 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
Also note that CANCEL is hop-by-hop (in stateful mode), this is: a
CANCEL is not relayed/forwarded by a proxy, but consumed/accepted by
the proxy (so it immediately replies 200) and then the proxy must
terminate *its* pending outgoing
2010/6/21 Alex Balashov abalas...@evaristesys.com:
On 06/21/2010 04:07 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
Also note that CANCEL is hop-by-hop (in stateful mode), this is: a
CANCEL is not relayed/forwarded by a proxy, but consumed/accepted by
the proxy (so it immediately replies 200) and then the
On Monday 21 June 2010, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
The t_newtran() just creates a new transaction. If you then process the
msg locally without forwarding you should release it. I think one reason
for providing this as dedicated function (after all t_relay does it as
well) is that you could
On Jun 21, 2010 at 11:58, Iñaki Baz Castillo i...@aliax.net wrote:
2010/6/21 Henning Westerholt henning.westerh...@1und1.de:
But take into account that after calling t_newtran() new data being
created in the script is not stored within the transaction information
(flags, AVP's...). It
2010/6/21 Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul and...@iptel.org:
I've tryed to use it in some scenarios and finally left it as it's
unfeasible.
IMHO new transaction data created after t_newtran() should be appended
to the transaction memory when t_relay is invoked.
flags lumps are appended on t_relay()
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Omar wrote:
Sorry if I am abusing this mailing list, please guide me where to submit my
request.
I am looking for freelancer to help me install a TLS enabled service based
on Kamailio. Please write back in case you are interested.
Hi Omar,
there is a dedicated
On Monday 21 June 2010, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
flags lumps are appended on t_relay() (ser 2.1, sr 3.*).
You can do things like:
t_newtran();
append_hf(FOO: bar\r\n);
t_relay();
and it will work as expected.
Hi Andrei,
ah! This is good to know, thanks for the
I am not 100% sure I fully understand my issue, but I think I'm on the right
track. I have a situation where Asterisk will drop calls a few seconds
after they are set up. What I believe is happening:
a=asterisk
k=kamailio
k -- INVITE -- a
a -- 100 TRYING -- k
a -- 183 RINGING -- k
a -- 200 OK
2010/6/21 Geoffrey Mina geoffreym...@gmail.com:
It doesn't appear that Kamailio is retransmitting the ACK. I would think
that would be part of the TM module, but perhaps I am not using it
properly. Is this possible or is there something else going on?
Are you using loose_route() in
On Friday 18 June 2010, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
[..]
Are there any manuals to install kamailio on Sun Machines?
No.
[..]
There exists notes about compiling an old version on various solaris flavours:
http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/install:configure-install-solaris-
sparc
Hi!
TM only handles retransmissions of single transaction.
The ACK is a new transaction, thus there won't be any retransmissions by
tm. tm will forward the retransmitted 200 OK and the client should
retransmit ACK.
Maybe you have a problem with NATs and the ACK is routing falsely. Take
a
SIPv6 UA Can't receive 404 (Not Found) response from openser register server
after sending REGISTER request with an invalid AoR. The details can be as
follows:
1 Test topology:
NUT(REG PX) UA11 UA12
DNS
Hi all,
SIPv6 UA Can't receive a 420 (Bad Extension) response from openser register
server after sending Registrar with Non-supported option-tag in Require filed.
The details can be as follows:
1 Test topology:
NUT(REG PX) UA11 UA12
Hi all,
A Record-Route header field exists in 200 OK from openser register server after
sending a REGISTER request with a Record-Route header field. The details can be
as follows:
1 Test topology:
NUT(REG PX) UA11 UA12
20 matches
Mail list logo
