On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 14:33 -0400, Robert Joly wrote: > > Our subscription code is not doing this in this case: the 202 > > response has a Record-Route, but the initial NOTIFY (which is > > sent before the > > 202) does not. > > > > This may or may not be related to the particular issue (tbd), > > but it certainly will bite us one way or another eventually, > > so I think we need to open an issue and fix it. Comments? > > I agree that this should be fixed. The record-route is the only means we > have to attach some state information to a dialog so having it work > reliably is indeed a very desirable behavior.
It's much, much worse than that: If the forked subscription needs record-route to work (e.g., in any remote-worker situation), not having the record-routes will guarantee failure. Dale _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
