Hi again > I don't seem to get it working as expected - still trying to figure out > what and where the call fails.
I think I have found what goes wrong. A => B => CFW => C C has MIN-SE: 900 A is initially sending Sestion-Timer: 600 Without 181 reply: C replies with 422 Timer too Small Min-SE: 900 This 422 Reply has a ToTag. A re-initiates the call with a larger session timer, that INVITE has NO ToTag - new transaction. The Calls succeeds. Now I repeat the same, but I send a 181 message back to A BEFORE A receives the 422 from C. That 181 has a ToTag. Now when A re-initiates the INVITE, it includes the ToTag received in the 181 and loose_route fails as there is no such transaction. Is A misbehaving by including a ToTag when it should not? Should the 181 reply not contain a ToTag? I again tried all variants * sl_send_reply() generates ToTag * send_reply() generates ToTag * t_reply() does not send the reply. Mit freundlichen Grüssen -Benoît Panizzon- -- I m p r o W a r e A G - Leiter Commerce Kunden ______________________________________________________ Zurlindenstrasse 29 Tel +41 61 826 93 00 CH-4133 Pratteln Fax +41 61 826 93 01 Schweiz Web http://www.imp.ch ______________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender!
