I do not know if it also works this way. I always used the version I
sent in the previous email and it always worked. Thus I never had the
need to change it.
klaus
Douglas Garstang wrote:
Ok...so... why not just call append_branch("192.168.10.8:5060") without first calling
rewritehostport("192.168.10.8")? It seems like redundant information.
-----Original Message-----
From: Klaus Darilion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 9:01 AM
To: Douglas Garstang
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Users] More Routing....
Where's the problem? in route[1] or in the failure route?
You need append branch in failure route
klaus
Douglas Garstang wrote:
Can someone please tell me why the following extremely simple example doesn't
first attempt to relay to 192.168.10.7, and then if that fails, try
192.168.10.8? What am I missing here? The documentation says that t_relay()
simple sends statefully to the current URI.... seems to be what I am doing.
What am I missing? Please help!
route(1);
route[1] {
rewritehostport("192.168.10.7:5060");
t_on_failure("2");
t_relay();
}
failure_route[2] {
rewritehostport('192.168.10.8:5060");
t_relay();
}
Doug.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
