On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 17:18 -0400, Scott Lawrence wrote: > On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 16:47 -0400, Andy Spitzer wrote: > > Woof! > > > > On Wed, 27 May 2009 16:41:18 -0400, K Eccles (JIRA) <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > K Eccles commented on XX-5648: > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > The content of the FROM header was changed in r14552 as a fix for > > > XX-4559 (nee xecs-2092) ACD: ACD Server Configuration failed and agents > > > are not ringing. > > > After r14552, the FROM header contains AOR of queue and the proxy does > > > not challenge the Invite to the agent, but phone displays the queue's > > > AOR. > > > After undoing the r14552 fix, the Invite to the agent has the same FROM > > > header as the original call but the proxy challenges the ACD's Invite > > > and the ACD does not respond to the challenge. > > > > > >> Caller ID for agent call is not correct in 4.0 ACD > > > > Is this another place where we can pre-compute the authorization, so the > > call isn't challenged and the From can be whatever we want? > > I think the short answer is yes. > > The longer version is that we could either: > > * Precompute a nonce acceptable to the proxy as though it had > challenged the ACD already (since we know how it does so, and > the secret it uses to validate the nonce, this is possible), and > then supply authentication based on that nonce. > > * Add a properly signed X-sipX-authidentity header that has the > identity of the ACD, which I believe will prevent the challenge > from the proxy (correct Robert?). > > The latter is simpler. > > There may be a third alternative: > > * Add a properly signed P-Asserted-Identity header that has the > identity of the ACD, which I believe will prevent the challenge > from the proxy (correct Robert?). >
When FROM header contains queue AOR, I get this proxy log message: SipRouter::proxyMessage From '<sip:[email protected]>;tag=2c947920894' not local to realm 'kelaptop.us.nortel.com' - do not challenge" It appears the invite from the ACD is not challenged because the ACDLine AOR(550...) does not appear in the credentials database. Is this guaranteed to be true? If so, should we rely on it? We could change just the display portion of the from header. (example) \"667-274 snom \"<sip:[email protected]>;tag=2c947920894 This displays "667-274 snom 550" on my LG-6830 Thoughts? -ke _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev
