* which contains last interface i sent INVITE to - means that uri in the Route hasinterface and it just same with interface I sent invite to. I understand hat it is not a dependency. * (Ignoring Route header that actually also exists in the Contact field) - means aslo existsi in the resquest. Not in the contact field offcource
2018-07-02 9:31 GMT+03:00 Yuriy Gorlichenko <[email protected]>: > Sorry for noize from my side > I just cant fully understand dependency: > > I understand that actually route header shoud not be ingnored because it > is shows way for the in-dialog packet > That is fine. > > Just regarding behaivor of the FreeSwitch and other UACs > > For now I have a next picture > > When my provider sends me 200 - it contains as Record-Route: 1.1.1.1:5060 > which contains last interface i sent INVITE to > Also it contains Contact: 1.1.1.1:5061 > > So when UAC receives this call without my proxy between provider and UAC > it sends ACK to Contact URI (Ignoring Route header that actually also > exists in the Contact field) sent at the 200 according rfc3261 -12.1.2 > (that I shared above) > > But when it sends via my proxy: > > UAC receives ACK with 2 Route headers (that is right) and sends it to the > topmost Route (myProxy) then my proxy as normal proxy resends it to the > provider using second Route (that topmost for now after myProxy removes > itself from Route set) > > But here provider says me - you should use Contact field to reach target > even from myProxy. > > So in this case - At the behaivor of UAC -> Provider it looks matched > 12.1.2 but I still cant understand why in this case it ignores Route header > at the ACK that actually exists > > > > 2018-07-02 9:02 GMT+03:00 Alex Balashov <[email protected]>: > >> On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 09:00:02AM +0300, Yuriy Gorlichenko wrote: >> >> > yep I understand that. >> > I just see that in fact ACK soudl ignore Route header if it... Single? >> >> What? No. >> >> There are two kinds of ACKs: hop-by-hop ACKs, which acknowledge negative >> final replies on every branch, and end-to-end ACKs, which are handled >> according to the rules for in-dialog requests. An ACK for a 2xx reply to >> an INVITE is going to be an in-dialog request, and under no >> circumstances should any Route headers be ignored unless they refer to >> the very proxy through which they are traversing. In that case, they >> should be stripped off before continuing with the next-hop Route. This >> is the standard loose-routing procedure labouriously articulated in the >> RFC, and implemented by loose_route(). >> >> -- >> Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC >> >> Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) >> Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List >> [email protected] >> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >> > >
_______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List [email protected] https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
