Hi Nathan, there are different aspects here. First of all, I think I've found what causes the PRACK not to contain the correct Route-HF. However, if 100rel is disabled, that does not mean that the SBC will filter out the Supported-tag by magic.
As an immediate fix, you should filter out the "100rel" out of the Supported-HF in the SBC profile (use regex header filter for that). Also, I will have to fix the issue with the missing Route-HF in the PRACK. Finally, it might be useful to introduce a "feature blacklist" for such things. This would basically filter out unwanted tags from the Supported-HF. We could also introduce the same type of feature for the Allow-HF and similar headers. Hope this helps! Raphael. On 19.09.2012, at 18:19, Nathan Angelacos wrote: > Hi, > > I'm having difficulty using sems 1.5.0 as a B2BUA SBC. > > A UA that supports 100rel originates a call to the PSTN via SEMS as a B2BUA > > 1. 100rel=disabled is set in sems.conf; but the outbound Supported > header contains "100rel." (It contains whatever the originating UA > advertised.) > > 2. The upstream carrier sends back a 183 with: > > Record-Route: <sip:carrier.ip:5060;lr> > Record-Route: <sip:proxyB.ip;lr=on;ftag=xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Record-Route: <sip:proxyA.ip:5060;lr=on;did=xxxxxxxx> > Require: 100rel > > Sems sends back a PRACK without the routing information, so proxyA is > unable to forward the PRACK. The call fails. > > > > The dialog completes if 100rel is filtered from the Supported header on > the originating UA. > > Am I missing something obvious? Or any other pointers on resolving this? > > IIRC, 1.4.x series did not have this behavior, I can test it if necessary. > > > Thanks! > > > > _______________________________________________ > Semsdev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/semsdev _______________________________________________ Semsdev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/semsdev
