[OpenSER-Users] Users Digest, Vol 32, Issue 70

[Padmaja]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <users-request at lists.openser.org>
To: <users at lists.openser.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:28 AM
Subject: Users Digest, Vol 32, Issue 70


> Send Users mailing list submissions to
> users at lists.openser.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> users-request at lists.openser.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> users-owner at lists.openser.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Forwarding to SRV records not working (James Holden)
>   2. Re: Serial fork terminated after 5 call (Bogdan-Andrei Iancu)
>   3. How to handle INVITES with different To: header (Peter P GMX)
>   4. Re: How to handle INVITES with different To: header
>      (Bogdan-Andrei Iancu)
>   5. Re: Forwarding to SRV records not working (Bogdan-Andrei Iancu)
>   6. OpenSER: no NOTIFY when updating PUBLISH if integrating with
>      OpenXCAP? (KevinKinnan)
>   7. OpenSER: no NOTIFY when updating PUBLISH if integrating with
>      OpenXCAP? (KevinKinnan)
>   8. Re: Problems trying to build an Active/Active OSer 1.3
>      cluster (Stefan Sayer)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:41:42 +0000
> From: James Holden <james.holden at uk.aql.com>
> Subject: [OpenSER-Users] Forwarding to SRV records not working
> To: users at lists.openser.org
> Message-ID: <20080122164142.GD4315 at james-desktop>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm having problems with OpenSER forwarding calls to a domain where
> there are only SRV records.
>
> OpenSER seems not to perform any balancing or failover when a target
> server is unavailable or gives an error.
>
> I wish to forward calls to a number of onward gateways that at times may
> not respond at all, or may respond with something like "503 Service
> Unavailable".
>
> The actual destination address is derived from an enum lookup, but it
> may be for example 123456 at example.com
>
> There are SRV records as follows:
>
> _sip._udp.example.com. 600 IN    SRV  10 50 5060 gw1.example.com.
> _sip._udp.example.com. 600 IN    SRV  10 50 5060 gw2.example.com.
>
> The behaviour I'd expect/like would be that OpenSER will distribute the
> calls between the two targets specified in the SRV records, and will
> fail over to the other target if one fails to respond or gives a fatal
> error such as a 503.
>
> What actually happens, is that the calls all go to the first one
> regardless.
>
> Are my expectations reasonable?
>
> Does OpenSER's SRV record implementation work like this or am I misled?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> James
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:49:21 +0200
> From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at voice-system.ro>
> Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] Serial fork terminated after 5 call
> To: Sergey Babichev <zaikini at yandex.ru>
> Cc: users at lists.openser.org
> Message-ID: <47961E91.7080003 at voice-system.ro>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi Sergey,
>
> the most important thing when searching is to know where to search ;)...
> See:
>    http://www.openser.org/docs/modules/1.2.x/nathelper.html#AEN370
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
>
> Sergey Babichev wrote:
>> Okey:)) And last question about documentation, I searched documentation 
>> about function nat_uac_test from nathelper module for version 1.2.x and 
>> I'm find it in documentation for version 0.9. Openser 1.2.x not support 
>> function nat_uac_test or documentation 1.2.x not full?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>
>>
>>
>>> I'm afraid there is no docs about the errors - the idea is to have
>>>
>>
>>
>>> sef-explaining error messages and to avoid documenting them ;)
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>
>>
>>> bogdan
>>>
>>
>>
>>> Sergey Babichev wrote:
>>>
>>
>>
>>>> Thanks, where i can read about this error (discarding fwd for a 
>>>> cancelled transaction) and others?
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> Hi Sergey,
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> the "discarding fwd for a cancelled transaction" error is generated 
>>>>> when
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> you try to send a request for a transaction that was already cancelled
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> from the client side. So probably the PSTN GW cancels the call while 
>>>>> you
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> still want to fork a new branch.
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> Bogdan
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> Sergey Babichev wrote:
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> Problem is appear when i calling from PSTN. It's work fine when i 
>>>>>> calling from sip account to huntgroup. I think this is problem whith 
>>>>>> timer in my PSTN gateway.
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Hi all!
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> I want enable hunting for my extensions. It's work fine, but if my 
>>>>>>> hunt group consists of more then 5 extensions, call terminated and I 
>>>>>>> see in syslog error:
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: 
>>>>>>> ERROR:tm:t_forward_nonack: discarding fwd for a cancelled 
>>>>>>> transaction
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: 
>>>>>>> ERROR:tm:w_t_relay: t_forward_nonack failed
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: 
>>>>>>> DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=5, save=0, relay=5
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> What is problem may be?
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Sergey Babichev
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Users mailing list
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> Users at lists.openser.org
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> Sergey Babichev
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> Users mailing list
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> Users at lists.openser.org
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Sergey Babichev
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Sergey Babichev
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:20:44 +0100
> From: Peter P GMX <Prometheus001 at gmx.net>
> Subject: [OpenSER-Users] How to handle INVITES with different To:
> header
> To: users at lists.openser.org
> Message-ID: <479633FC.2090506 at gmx.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
>
> I have the following scenario:
>
> I receive a request with PSTN_number at my.ip.add.res from my VoIP
> In alias_db I have defined a rule that  points  to yyy at myip.com which is
> a registered account
>
> After alias_db_lookup OpenSER invites as follows:
> Invite yyy at myip.com
> To: xxxxxxx at my.ip.add.res
>
> The UA (actually a PBX with VoIP support) answers with 404 not found.
>
> When I invite as follows:
> Invite yyy at myip.com
> To: yyy at myip.com
>
> everything works fine.
>
> My question: How do you handle these cases?
> Rewriting the To: part seems dificult and will mess up a lot - hein?
>
> Kind regards
> Peter
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:41:32 +0200
> From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at voice-system.ro>
> Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] How to handle INVITES with different To:
> header
> To: Prometheus001 at gmx.net
> Cc: users at lists.openser.org
> Message-ID: <479646EC.5090301 at voice-system.ro>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> According to RFC3261, in SIP, routing is exclusively done based on RURI
> (and eventually Route hdrs). TO header has 0 implication in routing.
> So, your PBX is deprecated and out of standards and I suggest either
> upgrade, either replacement.
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
>
> Peter P GMX wrote:
>> I have the following scenario:
>>
>> I receive a request with PSTN_number at my.ip.add.res from my VoIP
>> In alias_db I have defined a rule that  points  to yyy at myip.com which is
>> a registered account
>>
>> After alias_db_lookup OpenSER invites as follows:
>> Invite yyy at myip.com
>> To: xxxxxxx at my.ip.add.res
>>
>> The UA (actually a PBX with VoIP support) answers with 404 not found.
>>
>> When I invite as follows:
>> Invite yyy at myip.com
>> To: yyy at myip.com
>>
>> everything works fine.
>>
>> My question: How do you handle these cases?
>> Rewriting the To: part seems dificult and will mess up a lot - hein?
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Peter
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:00:28 +0200
> From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at voice-system.ro>
> Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] Forwarding to SRV records not working
> To: James Holden <james.holden at uk.aql.com>
> Cc: users at lists.openser.org
> Message-ID: <4796596C.7000004 at voice-system.ro>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi James,
>
> Openser does not do balancing over records with same priority - it will
> just use the first (as returned by DNS server).
>
> But failover based on NAPTR and SRV records is in place.
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
>
>
> James Holden wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm having problems with OpenSER forwarding calls to a domain where
>> there are only SRV records.
>>
>> OpenSER seems not to perform any balancing or failover when a target
>> server is unavailable or gives an error.
>>
>> I wish to forward calls to a number of onward gateways that at times may
>> not respond at all, or may respond with something like "503 Service
>> Unavailable".
>>
>> The actual destination address is derived from an enum lookup, but it
>> may be for example 123456 at example.com
>>
>> There are SRV records as follows:
>>
>> _sip._udp.example.com. 600 IN    SRV  10 50 5060 gw1.example.com.
>> _sip._udp.example.com. 600 IN    SRV  10 50 5060 gw2.example.com.
>>
>> The behaviour I'd expect/like would be that OpenSER will distribute the
>> calls between the two targets specified in the SRV records, and will
>> fail over to the other target if one fails to respond or gives a fatal
>> error such as a 503.
>>
>> What actually happens, is that the calls all go to the first one
>> regardless.
>>
>> Are my expectations reasonable?
>>
>> Does OpenSER's SRV record implementation work like this or am I misled?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> James
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.openser.org
>> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:49:18 +0800
> From: KevinKinnan <kinnan2224 at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [OpenSER-Users] OpenSER: no NOTIFY when updating PUBLISH if
> integrating with OpenXCAP?
> To: <users at lists.openser.org>
> Message-ID: <BAY126-W641A1FEB850E880B28F56C43E0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
>
>
> Thank you so much, Franz!
>
> Indeed, the problem is coming from xml. It is well-formed but seems the 
> server can't understand it.
> The whole xml document I used is the similar with yours except the root 
> element with namespace which
> is showing below:
>
> <cr: ruleset xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:common-policy"
>                  xmlns:pr="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pres-rules"
>                  xmlns:cr="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:common-policy">
>
>
> I got no error sending the xml doc with this as beginning. Only no Notify 
> message after updating Publish,
> and sometimes the first Subscribe can't get through that  is no Notify 
> sending back from server. It's really
> weired! Anyway, I finally fix it with your advise, Thanks Indeed.
>
> Kevin,
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> ????? MSN ??????????
> http://mobile.msn.com.cn/
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> http://lists.openser.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20080123/d0c0eaa7/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:54:25 +0800
> From: KevinKinnan <kinnan2224 at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [OpenSER-Users] OpenSER: no NOTIFY when updating PUBLISH if
> integrating with OpenXCAP?
> To: <users at lists.openser.org>
> Message-ID: <BAY126-W54DBFD8ACBD075E90FE4F6C43E0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
>
>
> Franz,
>
> Have you tested 'validity' rule and 'sphere' rule under Openser + 
> Openxcap?
>
> Regards,
> Kevin
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> ?????????????????
> http://get.live.cn
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> http://lists.openser.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20080123/abf5be17/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:04:19 +0100
> From: Stefan Sayer <stefan.sayer at iptego.de>
> Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] Problems trying to build an Active/Active
> OSer 1.3 cluster
> To: Ra?l Alexis Betancor Santana <rabs at dimension-virtual.com>
> Cc: users at lists.openser.org
> Message-ID: <47966863.7020708 at iptego.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hello,
>
> Ra?l Alexis Betancor Santana wrote:
>> Hi all, I'm trying to build an Active/Active OpenSer 1.3 cluster with
>> 2 nodes.
>>
>> All it's working ok for the REGISTER messages throught the use of
>> t_replicate and add_path, but I've problems with the INVITE messages.
>>
>> Both servers share the same location table on a PostgreSQL Multimaster
>> cluster (but that's irrelevant, the PostgreSQL cluster I mean...),
> > using db_mode = 2
> just out of curiosity: if you have DB multimaster replication in place,
> why do you replicate REGISTERs on SIP level as well?
>
> Stefan
>
>
>>
>> An that's the logic I used:
>>
>> - On REGISTER ->>
>>
>>   - Auth Request
>> - NAT ?
>> - add_path
>> - t_replicate(oser2)
>>
>> - On INVITE ->>
>>
>>   - Auth Request
>>   - lookup
>>   - Load prefs from DB
>>   - relay
>>
>> The problem I'm having is that the lookup function changes the RURI of
>> the message on node1 BEFORE taking into account the "Path:" element
>> present inside the AoR, so when the INVITE gets forwarded to node2
>> (where the NATed UAC it's registered), node2 deny the relaying of the
>> message because $rD of the RURI it's not local (remember that the RURI
>> whas changed on node1).
>>
>> Is there any way to know on node1 that the INVITE request MUST obey
>> the "Path:" so I could to something like:
>>
>> $old_ru = $ru
>> lookup("location")
>> if(path_exists())
>> {
>>  $ru = $old_ru
>> }
>> ...
>> t_relay()
>>
>> ??
>>
>> Any other aproach ?
>>
>> Best regards
>> --
>> Ra?l Alexis Betancor Santana
>> Dimensi?n Virtual S.L.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.openser.org
>> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> -- 
> Stefan Sayer
> VoIP Services
>
> stefan.sayer at iptego.de
> www.iptego.de
>
> iptego GmbH
> Am Borsigturm 40
> 13507 Berlin
> Germany
>
> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 101010
> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alexander Hoffmann
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.openser.org
> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
> End of Users Digest, Vol 32, Issue 70
> *************************************
>