Re: [SR-Users] Issue with ACK's

Hi Alex, Thanks for that, I’ve been reading the RFC but clearly missed the bit about section 13. Dan > On 30 Nov 2018, at 15:10, Alex Balashov wrote: > > Hi, > > Note that there are two different kinds of ACKs. An ACK for a 2xx > transaction is an in-dialog request that follows the rules

Re: [SR-Users] Issue with ACK's

Hi, Note that there are two different kinds of ACKs. An ACK for a 2xx transaction is an in-dialog request that follows the rules for Section 13, and having two Via hops in one of those is entirely appropriate. On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 02:59:52PM +, Dan Quinney wrote: > Hi all, > > I’m

[SR-Users] Issue with ACK's

Hi all, I’m having some issues with ACK’s. Specifically, when an ACK reaches Kamailio from either Asterisk or an endpoint, Kamailio is adding a second Via header - which isn’t valid as per RFC 3261 (17.1.1.3); “The ACK MUST contain a single Via header field, and this MUST be equal