Hi Tele,
ok - I made a bit of digging into your trace and the found the problem.
As you suspected it is related to the fact that the UAS does not mirror
all the RR parameters. The ftag is not mirror and this flag is required
as it is used to tell the direction (up or downstream) of the sequential
requests.
So, your proxy founds the vsf tag, but it has no clue (due missing ftag)
if the change the TO or FROM URI.
regards,
bogdan
tele wrote:
Hi bogdan,
I'm apologize to insist regarding this but i'm trying to understand. i
think that i've not supplied to you all the necessary informations.
If you have a look on the pcap attached, there are two call, the first
was OK and the second one with the FROM problem. I can see the Re-INVITE
FROM URI and TO URI are correctly swapped, the only difference in the UA
with problem is the Route header that was mirror with only the vsf
parameter and not the other ones. If i'm wrong could you please explain
much more the issue, still unclear to me :-)
thank you very much,
:tele
On Mon, 2007-04-16 at 17:16 +0300, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi tele,
yes, the RR headers must be mirror without no change (URI and
parameters), but the problem in your case was not the RR (which was ok),
but the FROM URI - the re-INVITE has a different FROM URI than the
original INVITE.
regards,
bogdan
tele wrote:
Hi,
The vendor said:
"Our implementation of SIP manages in various way regarding the other
device in test, header field “Record” (in particular not retrasmit all
param but filter, for example the "lr" parameter). That cause calling to
consider the proxy of type “strict” and changes the Request-Uri of the
ACK"
We've also notice that the vendor UA not mirror all the RR parameters
for example:
RR of INVITE from OpenSER to -> UA
Record-Route:
<sip:IP;lr=on;ftag=80b12060-52d7a475-13c4-53c-e3a1aea-53c;vsf=AAAAAAMIBgQEDwcGCAR4DHJeXkkYTQQbQ0xJHkBsZXhpYS5jb206NTA2MA-->
and the Re-INVITE from UA to OpenSER
Route:
<sip:IP;vsf=AAAAAAMIBgQEDwcGCAR4DHJeXkkYTQQbQ0xJHkBsZXhpYS5jb206NTA2MA-->
So i think OpenSER use the ftag and vsf parameter of Route header for
generate the correct From header.. is that true?
so the vendor UA MUST mirror untouched all the parameters?
thanks,
:tele
On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 17:27 +0300, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi tele,
the problem is with the re-INVITE which is malformed.
original INVITE had the FROM URI
<sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060>, but the re-INVITE has
<sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:5060>....
the FROM URI does not change during the dialog. It looks like UA bug.
regards,
bogdan
tele wrote:
Hi all,
I'm occured in this problem already seen here:
http://www.openser.org/pipermail/users/2006-March/003540.html
My problem occured between two different UA and only in case of a
Re-INVITE for a T.38 fax communication.
Im' using openser 1.2.0.
I'm doing some translation with From for a correct CLI screening.
I'm also checked that the RR parameters are correctly mirrored.
find attached here the debug.log and a network trace.
thank you
:tele
_______________________________________________
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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
