Ok I see it now. Indeed the responses are never propagated. I can tell
from the record routes taht your unmanaged gateway is another sipx. I
do remember posts in the past from the old maintainers that 302
initiated by a third party is not advisable because it may conflict with
sipx internal routing. That could be causing this glitch. If you want
to tackle this even further, feel free to send in the DEBUG level proxy
logs. perhaps it will tell more as to what really transpired with those
missing packets.
On 02/07/2012 06:37 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
Sorry the filter was too strict maybe try with this one
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Joegen Baclor <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
From what i saw, the capture does not make any sense. I don't see
the 183 and the 200 you were mentioning.
On 02/07/2012 05:49 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
I've just start a preliminary work on this issue, and i start
working on this use case:
call forwarding to external number,
so A, B and C where C is not local extension, reachable through
an unmanaged gateway (so without sbc)
what i see is that:
A call B,
B sends 302 to A but this message is handled by the proxy that
creates a new invite for C
C reply to invite with 183 and then with 200 ok but none of this
messages are forwarded to A
as consequence in the cdr we have just a not connected call.
here I attach the related pcap to this scenario just to be sure
the the source isn't into some wrong config
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
List Archive:http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
_______________________________________________
sipx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev/
