ancu
> *Cc:* users@lists.opensips.org
> *Subject:* Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] handling multiple proxy / Record-Route
>
> thank you, this is a problem as I do not control this proxy (2.2.2.2),
> is there a suggested way of handling this problem ?
>
> Maybe there is something esle wrong o
INVITE
> > Record-Route:
> >
> > P2 --> P1
> > 100 Trying
> > Record-Route:
> > Record-Route:
> >
>
>
> This is not correct. The RR of P2 most me on top of RR of P1 - adding RR
> headers works as a stack.
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
> >
> > Is there something wrong ? shouldn't proxy
; > P2 --> P1
> > 100 Trying
> > Record-Route:
> > Record-Route:
> >
>
>
> This is not correct. The RR of P2 most me on top of RR of P1 - adding RR
> headers works as a stack.
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
> >
> > Is there something wrong ? shouldn't proxy 2.2.2.2 add his
> > Record-Route on top
dan-Andrei Iancu
Cc: users@lists.opensips.org
Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] handling multiple proxy / Record-Route
thank you, this is a problem as I do not control this proxy (2.2.2.2), is there
a suggested way of handling this problem ?
Maybe there is something esle wrong on my side cusaing this
t: Thu 30/04/2009 3:44 PM
To: Julien Chavanton
Cc: users@lists.opensips.org
Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] handling multiple proxy / Record-Route
Hi Julian,
Julien Chavanton wrote:
>
>
> UA --> PROXY 1.1.1.1 --> PROXY 2.2.2.2 --> UA
>
> P1 --> P2
> INVITE
> *From:* Bogdan-Andrei Iancu [mailto:bog...@voice-system.ro]
> *Sent:* Thu 30/04/2009 8:12 AM
> *To:* Julien Chavanton
> *Cc:* users@lists.opensips.org
> *Subject:* Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] handling multiple proxy / Record-Route
>
> Hi Julien,
>
> I think Asterisk is
__
From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu [mailto:bog...@voice-system.ro]
Sent: Thu 30/04/2009 8:12 AM
To: Julien Chavanton
Cc: users@lists.opensips.org
Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] handling multiple proxy / Record-Route
Hi Julien,
I think Asterisk is doing the job properly. As you see the 200
Hi Julien,
I think Asterisk is doing the job properly. As you see the 200 OK has:
Contact: .
Record-Route: .
Record-Route: .
So, Asterisk is generating the ACK with the Contact in RURI and the
Route set in the reverted order (correct loose routing).
-> RURI: sip:15141234...@2.2.2.2
Hi,
I have a situation whit multiple proxy where ACK is not sent as I would expect.
if we look at the following "200 OK", I am expecting ACK to be sent to 1.1.1.1
but the "Asterisk PBX 1.6.0.6." is selecting 2.2.2.2 is this normal ?
Do I have to handle Record-Route differently ?
U 1.1.1