[OpenSIPS-Users] 503 reply goes to? help

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bogdan at voice-system.ro
Thu Feb 12 09:00:20 CET 2009


According to RFC 3261, the defining elements for a dialog are Callid, 
To-tag and From-tag. TO-uri and From-uri are obsolete .

Regards,
Bogdan

Brett Nemeroff wrote:
> I was a little confused. I was trying to explain to the operator that 
> the reply doesn't have a RURI and that I send it with the same To/From 
> headers they send me. 
>
> I did check the headers and they are they same.. I'm going to be doing 
> some more testing on this tomorrow. It's my understanding that they 
> should be matching dialogs based on the to_tag and the callid, isn't 
> that right? And in general, I shouldn't mess with the to/from headers, 
> right?
>
> -Brett
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 1:52 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 
> <bogdan at voice-system.ro <mailto:bogdan at voice-system.ro>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Brett,
>
>     Ok, more clear now :)
>
>     " ...because the "To:" field doesn't match the RURI."
>
>     I guess they refer at RURI from IINVITE request and TO hdr from
>     reply ? If so, Both this entities are generated by UAC. The TO hdr
>     from reply is the TO header from INVITE (plus the TO tag).
>
>     So, can you visually check if the To tag (as uri) from INVITE is
>     the same as in the 503 reply you sent ?
>
>     Regards,
>     Bogdan
>
>
>     Brett Nemeroff wrote:
>
>         Ugh! I didn't make that easy, did I.. Yes, in failure route I
>         t_reply (not relay) with a 503. They ignore the REPLY, there
>         is no new branch. The UAC is ignoring my REPLY and the
>         operator of that device is telling me that it's because the
>         "To:" field doesn't match the RURI.
>
>         On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 1:26 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>         <bogdan at voice-system.ro <mailto:bogdan at voice-system.ro>
>         <mailto:bogdan at voice-system.ro
>         <mailto:bogdan at voice-system.ro>>> wrote:
>
>            Hi Brett,
>
>
>            Brett Nemeroff wrote:
>
>                All,
>                I'm having an issue with a customer's nextone sbc. They
>         send a
>                call out, I send it to my upstream. My upstream is broken
>                (separate issue althogether). They send me 183..183.. 500.
>                When I get the 500, I send a 503 to the originator of the
>                request (my customer)
>
>            So, in failure_route you replace the received 500 with a 503
>            reply, right?
>
>
>                .. and they ignore the request, so I retransmit it 4-5
>         times..
>
>            request? you said you already received the reply....I guess you
>            retransmit the reply ? ..or maybe I'm missing something.
>
>                I'm not doing anything weird. I'm using t_relay for the
>         503 in
>                a failure route and I'm not rewriting anything other
>         than the
>                original request ruri. No funny business with tags.
>
>            you mean t_reply() ? I see no new branch in the flow you post.
>
>            What the pseudo-trace shows is the UAC not accepting the
>         503 from
>            your side, is this the issue?
>
>            Regards,
>            Bogdan
>
>
>                During the transaction, other requests replies seem to
>         work:
>
>                 60.793458  62.25.18.34 -> 75.82.100.5  SIP/SDP Request:
>                INVITE sip:5216161079999 at 75.82.100.5
>         <mailto:sip%3A5216161079999 at 75.82.100.5>
>                <mailto:sip%3A5216161079999 at 75.82.100.5
>         <mailto:sip%253A5216161079999 at 75.82.100.5>>
>                <mailto:sip%3A5216161079999 at 75.82.100.5
>         <mailto:sip%253A5216161079999 at 75.82.100.5>
>                <mailto:sip%253A5216161079999 at 75.82.100.5
>         <mailto:sip%25253A5216161079999 at 75.82.100.5>>>;user=phone, with
>
>                session description
>
>
>                 60.796605  75.82.100.5 -> 62.25.18.34  SIP Status: 100
>         Giving
>                a try
>
>                 60.796847  75.82.100.5 -> 202.152.59.3 SIP/SDP Request:
>                INVITE sip:5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3
>         <mailto:sip%3A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3>
>                <mailto:sip%3A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3
>         <mailto:sip%253A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3>>
>                <mailto:sip%3A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3
>         <mailto:sip%253A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3>
>                <mailto:sip%253A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3
>         <mailto:sip%25253A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3>>>, with session
>
>                description
>
>
>                 60.822516 202.152.59.3 -> 75.82.100.5  SIP Status: 100
>         Trying
>
>                 60.891115 202.152.59.3 -> 75.82.100.5  SIP/SDP Status: 183
>                Session Progress, with session description
>
>                 60.892837  75.82.100.5 -> 62.25.18.34  SIP/SDP Status: 183
>                Session Progress, with session description
>
>                 60.903312  62.25.18.34 -> 75.82.100.5  SIP Request: PRACK
>                sip:5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3:5060
>         <http://sip:5216161079999@202.152.59.3:5060>
>                <http://sip:5216161079999@202.152.59.3:5060>
>                <http://sip:5216161079999@202.152.59.3:5060>
>
>                 60.905058  75.82.100.5 -> 202.152.59.3 SIP Request: PRACK
>                sip:5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3:5060
>         <http://sip:5216161079999@202.152.59.3:5060>
>                <http://sip:5216161079999@202.152.59.3:5060>
>                <http://sip:5216161079999@202.152.59.3:5060>
>
>
>                 60.919007 202.152.59.3 -> 75.82.100.5  SIP Status: 200 OK
>
>                 60.919730  75.82.100.5 -> 62.25.18.34  SIP Status: 200 OK
>
>                 66.324643 202.152.59.3 -> 75.82.100.5  SIP Status: 500
>                Internal Server Error
>
>                 66.325256  75.82.100.5 -> 202.152.59.3 SIP Request: ACK
>                sip:5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3
>         <mailto:sip%3A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3>
>                <mailto:sip%3A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3
>         <mailto:sip%253A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3>>
>                <mailto:sip%3A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3
>         <mailto:sip%253A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3>
>                <mailto:sip%253A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3
>         <mailto:sip%25253A5216161079999 at 202.152.59.3>>>
>
>
>
>                 66.326427  75.82.100.5 -> 62.25.18.34  SIP Status: 503
>                Service Unavailable
>
>                 66.796377  75.82.100.5 -> 62.25.18.34  SIP Status: 503
>                Service Unavailable
>
>                 67.797229  75.82.100.5 -> 62.25.18.34  SIP Status: 503
>                Service Unavailable
>
>                 69.798014  75.82.100.5 -> 62.25.18.34  SIP Status: 503
>                Service Unavailable
>
>                 74.689429  62.25.18.34 -> 75.82.100.5  SIP Request: CANCEL
>                sip:5216161070241 at 75.82.100.5
>         <mailto:sip%3A5216161070241 at 75.82.100.5>
>                <mailto:sip%3A5216161070241 at 75.82.100.5
>         <mailto:sip%253A5216161070241 at 75.82.100.5>>
>                <mailto:sip%3A5216161070241 at 75.82.100.5
>         <mailto:sip%253A5216161070241 at 75.82.100.5>
>                <mailto:sip%253A5216161070241 at 75.82.100.5
>         <mailto:sip%25253A5216161070241 at 75.82.100.5>>>;user=phone
>
>
>
>                 74.690889  75.82.100.5 -> 62.25.18.34  SIP Status: 200
>         canceling
>
>
>                See, that 503 at the bottom doesn't make it through..
>                Another bit of information. The "To:" header contains a
>         prefix
>                to the RURI. I don't care, I ignore the to header.. The 503
>                reply ALSO has the To Header. The customer, is telling
>         me that
>                the To: header in the 503 reply  needs to match the RURI. I
>                believe that I shouldn't ever touch the To: or From:
>         headers
>                and that they should match exactly what he sent me.
>
>
>                Any ideas what's going on here? Am I off base?
>
>
>              
>          ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>                _______________________________________________
>                Users mailing list
>                Users at lists.opensips.org
>         <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>         <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org
>         <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>>
>
>                http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>                
>
>
>
>




More information about the Users mailing list