Actually you are right, the message_flow_id would have the same effect
there - the idea is to have an UAC B2B already established (to welcome,
to flow_id, doesn;t matter) before having the UAC leg to agent (that may
be rejected).
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
https://www.opensips-solutions.com
OpenSIPS Summit 27-30 Sept 2022, Athens
https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/
On 8/16/22 10:21 AM, Ryzhik Ivan wrote:
You are right. But message_flow_id (i did invite-200-bye with no real
rtp) fixed the issue for me for now too. Maybe it should be added to
FAQ or also as a limitation.
Thanks for great help.
Regards, Ivan.
вт, 16 авг. 2022 г. в 09:57, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>:
Ivan, not that one, but the |"message_welcome" URI !
Regards,|||
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
https://www.opensips-solutions.com <https://www.opensips-solutions.com>
OpenSIPS Summit 27-30 Sept 2022, Athens
https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/
<https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/>
On 8/16/22 9:20 AM, Ryzhik Ivan wrote:
Thank you, Bogdan.
I'm using message_flow_id uri already. That would be good if it
was documented as a limitation.
Regards,
Ivan
15 aug 2022 г. в 17:16, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>:
Hi Ivan,
I did some more digging into this and I managed to reproduce
the issue and understand it. The REJECT'ion even in B2B is
triggered only in the sequential bridging's, but not in the
original setup bridging.
So, what you have to do it is to set a welcome message for
sure in the queue - this fixed the issue for me for now. I
will check further if this can be addressed in any other way,
otherwise I will document it as a limitation.
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
https://www.opensips-solutions.com
<https://www.opensips-solutions.com>
OpenSIPS Summit 27-30 Sept 2022, Athens
https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/
<https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/>
On 8/9/22 4:55 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Thanks Ivan,
The relevant log is
DBG:call_center:b2bl_callback_customer: call
(0x7f0a08e95a00) has event 4
But the event 4 (B2B leg destroyed) is a wrong one in this
case, it should have been 2 (B2B leg rejected). It seems the
problem is in the B2B logic somewhere.
Let me do some digging there.
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
https://www.opensips-solutions.com
<https://www.opensips-solutions.com>
OpenSIPS Summit 27-30 Sept 2022, Athens
https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/
<https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/>
On 8/9/22 3:04 PM, Ryzhik Ivan wrote:
Hi,
thank you for your reply.
There is no B2B_REJECT_CB in my case. See log below, only
B2B_DESTROY_CB
2022-08-09T11:44:27.788721+00:00
DBG:call_center:b2bl_callback_customer: call
(0x7f0a08e95a00) has event 4,
2022-08-09T11:44:27.788767+00:00
DBG:call_center:b2bl_callback_customer: A delete in
b2blogic, call->state=6, 0x7f0a08e95a00
Negative reply processed in _b2b_handle_reply, but the
tuple->state is not in B2B_BRIDGING_STATE and
process_bridge_negreply doesn't called with cbf(&cb_params,
B2B_REJECT_CB);.
2022-08-09T11:44:27.769757+00:00
DBG:b2b_logic:_b2b_handle_reply: Negative reply [486] -
delete[0x7f0a08e95b28]
2022-08-09T11:44:27.769808+00:00
DBG:b2b_logic:b2b_mark_todel: 0x7f0a08e95b28
P.S. But with message_flow_id uri in db (its do simple
200/bye on invite) - all works fine , because negative
reply is in B2B_BRIDGING_STATE. But this is not a good way.
Thank you very much.
log:
[....]
вт, 9 авг. 2022 г. в 11:36, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>:
Hi,
In such a case, in `b2bl_callback_customer()` you
should get a B2B_REJECT_CB event.
Could you post here the logs in log_level 4 (debug) for
your test call ?
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
https://www.opensips-solutions.com
<https://www.opensips-solutions.com>
OpenSIPS Summit 27-30 Sept 2022, Athens
https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/
<https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/>
On 8/8/22 11:48 AM, Ryzhik Ivan wrote:
Hi @All.
I have a simple flow with 2 agents. When call
entering queue by cc_handle_call("600")
and the first agent rejects call (busy or decline) -
queue also rejects call with same reason and does
not proceed to second agent.
I looked at sources - negative replies processed only
in B2B_BRIDGING_STATE. But for that time i
have B2B_NOTDEF_STATE only.
What am I doing wrong?
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
<http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
<http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
<http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
