Very clear ! thanks.
Le jeudi 08 juillet 2010 à 13:00 +0200, Klaus Darilion a écrit :
>
> Am 07.07.2010 19:30, schrieb inge:
> > Yes, why not, but in a few moment ;)
> >
> > Does SER 3.0 released ? In the siprouter project ?
>
> There is no ser/sip-router 3.0 "release". You have to checkout the
Am 07.07.2010 19:30, schrieb inge:
Yes, why not, but in a few moment ;)
Does SER 3.0 released ? In the siprouter project ?
There is no ser/sip-router 3.0 "release". You have to checkout the
sip-router 3.0 branch from git if you want "ser" flavor of sip-router.
If you do not care about the
Yes, why not, but in a few moment ;)
Does SER 3.0 released ? In the siprouter project ?
Le mercredi 07 juillet 2010 à 09:17 +0200, Klaus Darilion a écrit :
>
> Am 06.07.2010 20:03, schrieb inge:
> > I quickly tried this but I cannot used "exec" within the onreply_route.
> >
> > So the problem s
Am 06.07.2010 20:03, schrieb inge:
I quickly tried this but I cannot used "exec" within the onreply_route.
So the problem stay the same. I don't know how to execute my script only
on established calls...
Upgrade to 3.0 ;-)
regards
klaus
___
SIP E
I quickly tried this but I cannot used "exec" within the onreply_route.
So the problem stay the same. I don't know how to execute my script only
on established calls...
Any help/suggestion would be appreciate. Thank you !
Regards,
Adrien
Le mardi 06 juillet 2010 à 19:32 +0200, inge a écrit :
>
Hi Alex,
It seems to be exactly what I want to do.
Unfortunately, I'm running SER 0.9.x and "t_check_trans" doesn't exist.
I was thinking also that I can probably do a "setflag" on an INVITE and
test it within the onreply-route. In that case, CANCEL should never came
into this call-flow.
Because
2010/7/6 Iñaki Baz Castillo :
> 2010/7/6 inge :
>> it seems that the CSeq on ACK contains the ACK himself. Probably because
>> ACK is a request and not a response.
>
> Please explain better what you mean as this text makes no lot of sense :)
Ah, you meant the method within the CSeq header, then it
Hi Adrien,
On 07/06/2010 10:39 AM, inge wrote:
Firstly, I was thinking to make a difference using the CSeq field, but
it seems that the CSeq on ACK contains the ACK himself. Probably because
ACK is a request and not a response.
You are correct; ACK is a wholly different request and a separat
2010/7/6 inge :
> it seems that the CSeq on ACK contains the ACK himself. Probably because
> ACK is a request and not a response.
Please explain better what you mean as this text makes no lot of sense :)
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
___
SIP Express Router (
Hello all,
I need to work on particular ACK within the configuration of SER 0.9.9.
Firstly, I was thinking to make a difference using the CSeq field, but
it seems that the CSeq on ACK contains the ACK himself. Probably because
ACK is a request and not a response.
Would it be possible to proceed
10 matches
Mail list logo