(fixing the list address)
If the TU explicitly specifies a transport, sure.But if the TU has asked the stack to deal with this for it, the stack needs to populate the right things (think multiple interfaces with different policies wrt transports).
We may be running into a problem where we're saying the wrong thing by telling the stack to do this by only leaving the hostname blank.
RjS
On Feb 9, 2007, at 2:22 PM, Byron Campen wrote: I feel uneasy about touching the transport param at all; perhaps the UAC put one into its Contact for a reason! And if there wasn't one there in the first place, I think it should be safe to assume the UAC doesn't care what protocol stuff comes in on, so we shouldn't go adding one. I assume that the UAC is at least aware of what kinds of transports (TCP, UDP,TLS,...) it is listening on, and if its transport loadout is somehow incomplete, it should be prepared to compensate for its lack of compliance by putting explicit transport params into the Contact. My vote would be to remove the code block altogether.
Best regards, Byron Campen
In TransportSelector::transmit we are seeing a bug in the following case:
UAC sends a SUBSCRIBE over transport at TCP:5060 and puts the correct contact in the message
UAC receives 200/SUBSCRIBE with a Record-Route of UDP:5061
With the following code, we correctly send over UDP to target 5061 but we leave transport=tcp in the Contact which causes a problem for the UAS since it looks like a Contact refresh and subsequent requests from the peer are sent to TCP:5061 where there is no listener.
if (target.transport)
{
// There is a contact header and it contains exactly one entry
if (msg->exists(h_Contacts) && msg->header(h_Contacts).size()==1)
{
for (NameAddrs::iterator i=msg->header(h_Contacts).begin(); i != msg->header(h_Contacts).end(); i++)
{
NameAddr& contact = *i;
// No host specified, so use the ip address and port of the
// transport used. Otherwise, leave it as is.
if (contact.uri().host().empty())
{
contact.uri().host() = (target.transport->hasSpecificContact() ?
target.transport->interfaceName() :
Tuple::inet_ntop(source) );
contact.uri().port() = target.transport->port();
if (target.transport->transport() != UDP)
{
contact.uri().param(p_transport) = Tuple::toData(target.transport->transport());
}
My proposal is to remove the if (target.transport->transport() != UDP). Does anybody remember why this is here?
_______________________________________________ resiprocate-devel mailing list
_______________________________________________ resiprocate-devel mailing list
|