[SR-Users] Simultaneous usage of t_on_reply() and t_on_failure()
Hello everyone,
I wanted to ask those who know if Kamailio's behavior I'm facing is
expected or I should make some improvements to the configuration. Kamailio
version is 5.1.0.
I have a route where RTPEngine parameters are being collected and
*rtpengine_offer()* is called. After that *t_on_reply("REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP");*
followed by the *t_on_failure("FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP");* are used. The idea is
to process all responces except 415 or 488 from UAC as usual in
*onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* and use
*failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* to update SDP with *rtpengine_offer()* if
necessary.
*onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* just goes to *exit;* if *$rs* equals 415
or 488. This works fine with Htek phone which sends 100, 180 and then 488.
But I can not see *failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* execution for calls
to Zoiper which replies with 100 and immediately 415.
t_on_failure(failure_route) documentation says: "Sets failure routing
block, to which control is passed after a transaction completed with a
negative result but before sending a final reply." and to be honest I don't
really understand how lacking of responce prevents failure_route from
executing.
Thanks a lot!
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] Simultaneous usage of t_on_reply() and t_on_failure()
How many branches do you have? Failure route is called for the whole
transaction failure and not for every individual failed branch.
On 05.09.18 15:03, Володимир Іванець wrote:
Hello everyone,
I wanted to ask those who know if Kamailio's behavior I'm facing is
expected or I should make some improvements to the configuration.
Kamailio version is 5.1.0.
I have a route where RTPEngine parameters are being collected and
/rtpengine_offer()/ is called. After that
/t_on_reply("REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP");/ followed by the
/t_on_failure("FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP");/ are used. The idea is to process
all responces except 415 or 488 from UAC as usual in
/onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]/ and use
/failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]/ to update SDP with
/rtpengine_offer()/ if necessary.
/onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]/ just goes to /exit;/ if /$rs/ equals
415 or 488. This works fine with Htek phone which sends 100, 180 and
then 488. But I can not see
/failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]/ execution for calls to Zoiper
which replies with 100 and immediately 415.
t_on_failure(failure_route) documentation says: "Sets failure routing
block, to which control is passed after a transaction completed with a
negative result but before sending a final reply." and to be honest I
don't really understand how lacking of responce prevents failure_route
from executing.
Thanks a lot!
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] Simultaneous usage of t_on_reply() and t_on_failure()
There is only one branch_route - MANAGE_BRANCH. Same as in default Kamailio
configuration file.
Thank you.
2018-09-05 17:31 GMT+03:00 Vitalii Aleksandrov :
> How many branches do you have? Failure route is called for the whole
> transaction failure and not for every individual failed branch.
>
> On 05.09.18 15:03, Володимир Іванець wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I wanted to ask those who know if Kamailio's behavior I'm facing is
> expected or I should make some improvements to the configuration. Kamailio
> version is 5.1.0.
>
> I have a route where RTPEngine parameters are being collected and
> *rtpengine_offer()* is called. After that
> *t_on_reply("REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP");* followed by the
> *t_on_failure("FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP");* are used. The idea is to process
> all responces except 415 or 488 from UAC as usual in
> *onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* and use
> *failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* to update SDP with *rtpengine_offer()* if
> necessary.
>
> *onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* just goes to *exit;* if *$rs* equals 415
> or 488. This works fine with Htek phone which sends 100, 180 and then 488.
> But I can not see *failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* execution for
> calls to Zoiper which replies with 100 and immediately 415.
>
> t_on_failure(failure_route) documentation says: "Sets failure routing
> block, to which control is passed after a transaction completed with a
> negative result but before sending a final reply." and to be honest I don't
> really understand how lacking of responce prevents failure_route from
> executing.
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
>
> ___
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing
> Listsr-users@lists.kamailio.orghttps://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
>
>
> ___
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
>
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] Simultaneous usage of t_on_reply() and t_on_failure()
Am Mittwoch, 5. September 2018, 14:03:10 CEST schrieb Володимир Іванець:
> I wanted to ask those who know if Kamailio's behavior I'm facing is
> expected or I should make some improvements to the configuration. Kamailio
> version is 5.1.0.
>
> I have a route where RTPEngine parameters are being collected and
> *rtpengine_offer()* is called. After that *t_on_reply("REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP");*
> followed by the *t_on_failure("FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP");* are used. The idea is
> to process all responces except 415 or 488 from UAC as usual in
> *onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* and use
> *failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* to update SDP with *rtpengine_offer()*
> if necessary.
>
> *onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* just goes to *exit;* if *$rs* equals 415
> or 488. This works fine with Htek phone which sends 100, 180 and then 488.
> But I can not see *failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* execution for calls
> to Zoiper which replies with 100 and immediately 415.
>
> t_on_failure(failure_route) documentation says: "Sets failure routing
> block, to which control is passed after a transaction completed with a
> negative result but before sending a final reply." and to be honest I don't
> really understand how lacking of responce prevents failure_route from
> executing.
Hello,
I did not understand you completely here. Did you receive a 415 and the
failure route is not entered, or you did not receive a response as stated in
the last sentence?
If the failure_route is entered for the 488, then it should be also entered
for the 415. I am not aware of a special handling of this code in tm. (Only
that 415 is one of the replies that get a priority comparing to normal 4xx.)
I would suggest to try with debugging enabled and compare the logs for a
working, and for a non-working call. You could also try to concentrate on one
problem first, like the failure_route topic, and then combining this with the
reply_route.
Best regards,
Henning
--
Henning Westerholt
https://skalatan.de/blog/
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] Simultaneous usage of t_on_reply() and t_on_failure()
I think you need to use
t_on_branch_failure()
If I got you correctly
Regards, Igor
On Sep 6, 2018, 10:06 PM +0300, Henning Westerholt , wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 5. September 2018, 14:03:10 CEST schrieb Володимир Іванець:
> > I wanted to ask those who know if Kamailio's behavior I'm facing is
> > expected or I should make some improvements to the configuration. Kamailio
> > version is 5.1.0.
> >
> > I have a route where RTPEngine parameters are being collected and
> > *rtpengine_offer()* is called. After that *t_on_reply("REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP");*
> > followed by the *t_on_failure("FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP");* are used. The idea is
> > to process all responces except 415 or 488 from UAC as usual in
> > *onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* and use
> > *failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* to update SDP with *rtpengine_offer()*
> > if necessary.
> >
> > *onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* just goes to *exit;* if *$rs* equals 415
> > or 488. This works fine with Htek phone which sends 100, 180 and then 488.
> > But I can not see *failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* execution for calls
> > to Zoiper which replies with 100 and immediately 415.
> >
> > t_on_failure(failure_route) documentation says: "Sets failure routing
> > block, to which control is passed after a transaction completed with a
> > negative result but before sending a final reply." and to be honest I don't
> > really understand how lacking of responce prevents failure_route from
> > executing.
>
> Hello,
>
> I did not understand you completely here. Did you receive a 415 and the
> failure route is not entered, or you did not receive a response as stated in
> the last sentence?
>
> If the failure_route is entered for the 488, then it should be also entered
> for the 415. I am not aware of a special handling of this code in tm. (Only
> that 415 is one of the replies that get a priority comparing to normal 4xx.)
>
> I would suggest to try with debugging enabled and compare the logs for a
> working, and for a non-working call. You could also try to concentrate on one
> problem first, like the failure_route topic, and then combining this with the
> reply_route.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Henning
>
> --
> Henning Westerholt
> https://skalatan.de/blog/
>
> ___
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Re: [SR-Users] Simultaneous usage of t_on_reply() and t_on_failure()
Hello Igor and Henning,
I used t_on_branch_failure() instead of t_on_failure() as Igor suggested
and now I can see that *event_route[tm:branch-failure:FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]*
is executed for both Htek 488 and Zoiper 415 responces.
Thanks a lot for your help!
2018-09-08 9:46 GMT+03:00 Igor Olhovskiy :
> I think you need to use
> t_on_branch_failure()
> If I got you correctly
>
> Regards, Igor
> On Sep 6, 2018, 10:06 PM +0300, Henning Westerholt ,
> wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, 5. September 2018, 14:03:10 CEST schrieb Володимир Іванець:
>
> I wanted to ask those who know if Kamailio's behavior I'm facing is
> expected or I should make some improvements to the configuration. Kamailio
> version is 5.1.0.
>
> I have a route where RTPEngine parameters are being collected and
> *rtpengine_offer()* is called. After that *t_on_reply("REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP"
> );*
> followed by the *t_on_failure("FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP");* are used. The idea
> is
> to process all responces except 415 or 488 from UAC as usual in
> *onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* and use
> *failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* to update SDP with *rtpengine_offer()*
> if necessary.
>
> *onreply_route[REPLY_SIP_TO_SIP]* just goes to *exit;* if *$rs* equals 415
> or 488. This works fine with Htek phone which sends 100, 180 and then 488.
> But I can not see *failure_route[FAILURE_SIP_TO_SIP]* execution for calls
> to Zoiper which replies with 100 and immediately 415.
>
> t_on_failure(failure_route) documentation says: "Sets failure routing
> block, to which control is passed after a transaction completed with a
> negative result but before sending a final reply." and to be honest I don't
> really understand how lacking of responce prevents failure_route from
> executing.
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I did not understand you completely here. Did you receive a 415 and the
> failure route is not entered, or you did not receive a response as stated
> in
> the last sentence?
>
> If the failure_route is entered for the 488, then it should be also entered
> for the 415. I am not aware of a special handling of this code in tm. (Only
> that 415 is one of the replies that get a priority comparing to normal
> 4xx.)
>
> I would suggest to try with debugging enabled and compare the logs for a
> working, and for a non-working call. You could also try to concentrate on
> one
> problem first, like the failure_route topic, and then combining this with
> the
> reply_route.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Henning
>
> --
> Henning Westerholt
> https://skalatan.de/blog/
>
> ___
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
>
> ___
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
>
___
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
