If you look at the recent (yesterday and today) discussion on DISPATCH
the conclusion appears to be that this is how it should work and that
RFC 5626 should have been clearer on the behaviour.
Regards,
Peter
On 30/04/13 19:03, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Peter Dunkley writes:
Based on the discussions about outbound and in-dialog routing it seems
like we need to use GRUU and live with the fact that the route-set
changes (in breach of RFC 3261).
why would route set (the one recorded by record-route headers) change
because of gruu? it doesn't in my tests.
Can anyone share a Kamailio registrar configuration that uses GRUU to
look-up in-dialog requests (preferably one that makes use of
t_load_contacts(), t_next_contact(), and t_next_contact_flow())?
in-dialog requests don't deal with those t_ functions. after loose_route()
i use this:
if ($du == "") {
if (is_gruu()) {
if (!lookup("location")) {
send_reply("404", "Not Found");
exit;
} else {
xlog("L_INFO", "Routing in-dialog $rm <$ru> from <$fu> to
<$du>\n");
};
-- juha
_______________________________________________
sr-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
_______________________________________________
sr-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
