It is not really complicated to do, but I do not see the reason (why a
static dummy user should better than the client one, from carrier
perspective).
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com
On 02/05/2013 11:49 AM, Brett Nemeroff wrote:
Bogdan,
Thanks for this! This confirms my belief. Hopefully the static
userpart will meet the carrier's need. If it doesn't, would it be
complicated to preserve the original userpart?
Thanks for your help!
-Brett
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:38 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Brett,
1) a SIP URI without username is perfect valid.
2) as Contact URI is just for IP routing purposes, a username part
is totally useless.
3) preserving the username may "leak" topo info (you never know
what is the username content).
4) see the simple attached patch to force a static dummy username.
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com
On 02/05/2013 11:09 AM, Brett Nemeroff wrote:
Hello All,
I noticed that when invoking topology_hiding from the dialog
module that the contact header is rewritten without a userpart in
the URI. I've had some carriers complain about the lack of a
userpart. What is the reasoning for removing the userpart of the
URI and is there any way to safely add it back without breaking
in-dialog requests?
Thanks,
Brett
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
