Hi Ronald. Please open a feature request on tracker - so we will not forget of this issue.
Thanks and regards, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu OpenSIPS Founder and Developer http://www.opensips-solutions.com On 07/12/2013 12:18 AM, Ronald Cepres wrote: > Bogdan, > > Thanks for the advice. Although it might be a long shot, I hope acc > module can handle something like this in the future. I guess I'll just > try to adjust/increase the fr_inv_timer_avp value for now to minimize > this scenario. > > Cheers! > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi Ronald, > > I wouldn't go so far - even if you get 2 records for the > transaction based accounting, the values will be mixed. > > Regards, > > Bogdan-Andrei Iancu > OpenSIPS Founder and Developer > http://www.opensips-solutions.com > > > On 07/10/2013 03:08 PM, Ronald Cepres wrote: >> Bogdan, >> >> I am currently using CDR based. Does it mean that if I use >> transaction based, we will have more accurate resulting CDRs? >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hi Ronald, >> >> I never experienced such race (with multiple 200 oks on >> different branches)....But depending on what kind of >> accounting you do: >> - transaction based = you will get 2 START records and 2 >> STOP records, but with different TO tags.... >> - cdr based = you will get the values of the last 200 OK >> (which will overwrite the values of the first one).. >> >> I guess the ACC module was never designed to deal with such >> scenarios. >> >> Regards, >> >> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu >> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer >> http://www.opensips-solutions.com >> >> >> On 07/06/2013 02:25 AM, Ronald Cepres wrote: >>> Bogdan, >>> >>> Understood, and thanks for the info. >>> >>> However, I have some concerns with regards to the resulting >>> CDR using the acc and drouting modules. I think if both GWs >>> sent 200 OK at the same time, it would result in a CDR with >>> the values of AVPs specified by carrier_id_avp and gw_id_avp >>> drouting parameters set only to GW2. Also, if GW1 is the >>> last GW in the gwlist and this type of race condition >>> happens, the value of the AVPs will be set to blank. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Ronald, >>> >>> If the first GW sent any reply before the timeout, than >>> OpenSIPS will cancel it before hitting the failure >>> route. If no reply at all sent by GW1, OpenSIPS will hit >>> the failure route on timeout without canceling. If after >>> this point (call send to GW2) first GW sends a reply : >>> 1) if a provisional reply (<200), it will be >>> canceled on the spot >>> 2) if a 200 ok reply -> it will be accepted and fwd >>> to calling device >>> a) if the GW2 did not send a 200 OK, it will be >>> canceled >>> b) if GW2 also sent a 200 OK in the same time, >>> both 200 OK will be sent to calling device and it that >>> device will decide what call to keep >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu >>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer >>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com >>> >>> >>> On 07/04/2013 07:41 PM, Ronald Cepres wrote: >>>> >>>> Bogdan, >>>> >>>> Thanks for the informative reply. >>>> >>>> What I really want to solve is a problem I encounter >>>> when the first GW doesnt respond after a defined >>>> timeout then Opensips does failover to next GW. A few >>>> seconds after the call is routed to second GW, the >>>> first GW responds with 200 OK, which may cause >>>> problems. It seems that the first GW has a slow >>>> response time. >>>> >>>> The solution I am thinking of to prevent this is to >>>> send a cancel to the first GW before doing failover to >>>> next gateway. Does this make sense or is there a better >>>> solution? >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> -Ronald >>>> >>>> On Jul 4, 2013 11:58 PM, "Bogdan-Andrei Iancu" >>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello Ronald, >>>> >>>> When you hit the failure route, there is no ongoing >>>> branch left (doesn't matter how many you previously >>>> created) - so you should not worry about this. >>>> >>>> By SIP definition, a transaction fails (and >>>> OpenSIPS gets into failure route) only when all >>>> branches failed. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu >>>> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer >>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com >>>> >>>> >>>> On 07/03/2013 10:43 PM, Ronald Cepres wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Is there a way I can cancel a pending branch >>>>> before doing a fail-over to next gateway (due to >>>>> timeout from previous gateway)? This way I can >>>>> make sure that the call to the previous gateway >>>>> will not go through anymore after fail-over to the >>>>> next gateway, thus preventing us "double-charged" >>>>> situations if the previous gateway and the new >>>>> gateway both answered the call. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks in advance. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Ronald >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Users mailing list >>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Ronald Cepres >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Ronald Cepres >> Network Operations Center >> Net Voip Communications, Inc. >> >> >> This message contains confidential information and is intended only >> for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you >> should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify >> the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by >> mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission >> cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could >> be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or >> incomplete, >> or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept >> liability for >> any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise >> as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required >> please >> request a hard-copy version. Net Voip Communications, Inc., 2721 >> Forsyth Rd #256, Winter park, FL >> 32792. www.netvoipcommunications.com >> <http://www.netvoipcommunications.com/> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Ronald Cepres >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
