[reSIProcate] Potential bug in TransportSelector

[Jason Fischl]

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?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.resiprocate.org/pipermail/resiprocate-devel/attachments/20070209/d07c6b08/attachment.htm>