Hi! Thanks for a hint, will check. Actually changing only SDP leads to accepting new 200 as retransmission. On Jul 18 2019, at 1:05 am, Walter Doekes <walter.s...@wjd.nu> wrote: > Hi Igor, > > did you check the -rtcheck option? > According to the docs, it should support full and loose mode, where full > does a byte-by-byte check of the packet. Changing a single byte (or > generally, Via header branch) would make it a new request. > > https://github.com/SIPp/sipp/blob/93d593153dc433ec088261acf2559995137d797c/src/call.cpp#L271 > > Is there any way to make SIPP process each retransmission as a new response? > I'd assume the default '-rtcheck full' would do exactly that.. > Cheers, > Walter > > > On 24-06-19 12:13, Igor Olhovskiy wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I want to test following scenario > > -> INVITE > > <- 180 > > <- 200 > > (pause) > > <- 200 (5th retransmission) > > -> ACK > > > > Actually scenario is about correct 200 retransmission. Cause at some > > point 200 OK answer could be malformed by system and I want to avoid > > this with autotesting. > > > > But problem is that "broken" 200 OK retransmission are differs from > > correct one only with some headers, but callID and from/to tags are > > identical. So, I assume sipp just absorbs em with single > > > > <recv response="200"></recv> > > > > Is there any way to make SIPP process each retransmission as a new response? > > -- > > Best regards, > > Igor > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sipp-users mailing list > > Sipp-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sipp-users > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sipp-users mailing list > Sipp-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sipp-users >
_______________________________________________ Sipp-users mailing list Sipp-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sipp-users
