Klaus Darilion wrote:
On Wed, February 7, 2007 11:10, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu said:
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Hi!
As we have clarified the normal append_branch behaviour maybe we can
clarify the meaning in failure_route too:
failure_route[1] {
# send to voicebox
rewriteuri("sip:[EMAIL PROTECTED]");
append_branch();
t_relay();
}
I suspect that the new URI will be written into RURI (branches[0]). Then
append_branch() copies the URI from branches[0] into branches[1]. Then
t_relay sees 2 branches: branches[0] and branches[1]. But as branches[0]
is already "dead", only branches[1] will be releayed.
Is this correct?
yes this is correct - there is no special handling of append_branch() in
failure route. What is important to know is that the branch[0] in
failure route is the winning branch of the transaction and and inherits
all its attributes. So, if you had force_socket(sock1) for branch x
(before relay) and this is the winning branch in failure route, the
branch[0] will have the forced_socket "sock1" which will be again
inherit by the new branch after append_branch().
Thus - in failure_route - I always have to
1. change URI to new destination
2. append_branch().
If I would do it the other way round (1. append_branch, 2. change URI)
then I would again call the same URI.
Correct???
yes :)
regards,
bogdan
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
