On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Scott Lawrence <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 12:51 -0500, Dale Worley wrote: > > I've run into a case (XX-6909) where we aren't handling maddr parameters > > well enough for a call to succeed. In this case, OCS receives a call > > and sends a 200 using this Contact URI: > > <sip:comm:49171;transport=Tcp;maddr=192.168.3.47>. The 200 goes to the > > caller via sipXbridge, and the caller sends an ACK. When sipXbridge > > processes the ACK, it composes the request-URI for the ACK that it will > > send as <sip:comm:49171;transport=Tcp>. sipXbridge appears to do this > > because it knows that sipXproxy does not handle maddr parameters > > correctly. > > Why do you conclude that sipXbridge modifies the contact for the benefit > of the proxy? > I noted at one point that the proxy server was getting confused by maddr parameters that were pointed at the proxy server itself. Thus, I converted the maddr parameter to a route parameter. I am not sure if that is what is happening here. I will look into the trace. > Does the bridge leave the contact unmodified when it forwards the INVITE > to the proxy? > No it would not do that. SipXbridge sends the INVITE to the proxy server with a new Contact header pointing to sipXbridge. > Could you be clearer about what form the addressing of the ACK takes > when it arrives from the caller at the bridge and when sent back to the > caller from the bridge? > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ > -- M. Ranganathan
_______________________________________________ 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/
