Unfortainly it's the same result. Br,/Tobias
> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:19:34 +0200 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Sems] Regarding SEMS and SRV records > > Raphael Coeffic wrote: > > The second INVITE with authentication headers is a case similar to the > > 2xx-ACK: it represents a new transaction. > in this case, it should even be a new dialog. you could try what the > server says if you change the callid: > > diff --git a/core/plug-in/uac_auth/UACAuth.cpp > b/core/plug-in/uac_auth/UACAuth.cpp > index 97d4911..6fa0d60 100644 > --- a/core/plug-in/uac_auth/UACAuth.cpp > +++ b/core/plug-in/uac_auth/UACAuth.cpp > @@ -167,6 +167,7 @@ bool UACAuth::onSipReply(const AmSipReply& reply, > AmSipDialog::Status old_dlg_st > // reset remote tag so remote party > // thinks its new dlg > dlg->remote_tag = ""; > + dlg->callid = AmSession::getNewId() + "@" + > AmConfig::LocalIP; > } > // resend request > if (dlg->sendRequest(ri->second.method, > > > Stefan
_______________________________________________ Sems mailing list [email protected] http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/sems
