reSIProcate

Mailing Lists

Source Code

Google Search:



< Previous by Date Date Index Next by Date >
< Previous in Thread Thread Index Next in Thread >

Re: [reSIProcate] Question about Record-Route headers on re-Invite

Scott,
 
The code below does not work.
 
I put back in the fix my developer had created and the problem is solved.
 
I put my old fix back in and it now works correctly.
 
Here's the code for Dialog.cxx
 
if(mInviteSession == 0 || mRouteSet.size() == 0)
{
    if (code >=200 && code < 300)
    {
        if (response.exists(h_RecordRoutes))
        {
            mRouteSet = response.header(h_RecordRoutes).reverse();
        }
    }
}
 
In particular, this code never gets run because the route set is created during construction of the Dialog. That should be enough.
 
 
 
Bill Kovar
Avaya, Inc.
(732) 852-2609
 

From: Scott Godin [mailto:slgodin@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 5:30 PM
To: Kovar, William (Bill)
Subject: RE: [reSIProcate] Question about Record-Route headers on re-Invite

Hi Bill,

 

I’m just waiting back to hear from the developer that modified this code last before I commit a solution.  But here is what I have so far – if you want to try it out:

 

Modify the code in Dialog.cxx near line 561 to read.

 

      const SipMessage& response = msg;

      int code = response.header(h_StatusLine).statusCode();

      // If this is a 200 response to the initial request, then store the routeset (if present)

      if (creator && (creator->getLastRequest()->header(h_CSeq).sequence() == response.header(h_CSeq).sequence()) && code >=200 && code < 300)

      {

         if (response.exists(h_RecordRoutes))

         {

            mRouteSet = response.header(h_RecordRoutes).reverse();

         }

      }

 

Thanks,

 

Scott

 

From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kovar, William (Bill)
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:22 PM
To: resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [reSIProcate] Question about Record-Route headers on re-Invite

 

I'm seeing a situation where an initial session has been established with 2 Record-Route's set, i.e. IP1 & IP2.

 

When a re-invite sent, both Routes (IP1 & IP2) are used, however, the 200 OK only sends one (IP1).

 

The subsequent ACK generated only insert Route: IP1 and the final destination is never reached. This causes retransmission of the 200 OK over and over.

 

It seems like DUM/resip is over-writing the original Route set established with the initial session, which is an RFC 3261 violation - section 12.2

 

As I am on a version of resip prior to resip 1.0, is this a known problem and fixed??

 

Bill Kovar