Many thanks, I've managed to handle a call properly. I really want to thank Daniel, and all that have helped on this subject.
Regards J. On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 11:42 PM, Joel Serrano <j...@gogii.net> wrote: > Just a hint here, try setting $du and then t_relay... > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 11:55 Jean Cérien <cerien.j...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Hi >> >> While I'm trying to get the provider fix the SBC, I am implementing the >> workaround. >> >> Almost done here, storing and retrieving the correct address is fine, but >> when I set my $ru to the corrected value (asterisk IP), the t_relay still >> sends the packet to the kamailio IP - >> >> $ru="sip:number@asteriskip:5060"; >> if (!t_relay()) { >> .... >> >> Why would the t_relay forward to the kamailio IP and not the asterisk ? >> >> Rgds >> J >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 11:49 AM, Jean Cérien <cerien.j...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Many, many thanks ! >>> >>> I've posted the full dialog unredacted here: https://pastebin.com/ >>> EE9iwgZf >>> >>> The OK from Kamailio back to VOIP provider has >>> Record-Route: <sip:KAMAILIOIP;lr=on;ftag=SD2rbta01-8dd0e72b-0016-0379- >>> 0000-0000;did=e0c.e0a1> >>> Contact: <sip:NUMBER@ASTERISKIP:5060> >>> >>> So my understanding is that the ACK should be >>> ACK sip:NUMBER@ASTERISKIP:5060 SIP/2.0 >>> .... >>> and not >>> ACK sip:NUMBER@KAMAILIOIP:5060 SIP/2.0 >>> >>> Am I understanding correctly ? >>> >>> Rgds >>> J >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Sebastian Damm <d...@sipgate.de> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 2:39 PM, Jean Cérien <cerien.j...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for this answer. The voip provider is not really eager to alter >>>>> its SBC as it considers that the contact field is not mandatory in the >>>>> ACK. >>>>> The RFC states (section 8.1.1.8) >>>>> >>>> >>>> The problem is not that the ACK doesn't carry a Contact header. The >>>> problem is that the ACK is constructed incorrectly. This is what the RfC >>>> says to UAC behavior (section 12.1.2): >>>> >>>> The route set MUST be set to the list of URIs in the Record-Route >>>> header field from the response, taken in reverse order and preserving all >>>> URI parameters. If no Record-Route header field is present in the response, >>>> the route set MUST be set to the empty set. This route set, even if empty, >>>> overrides any pre-existing route set for future requests in this dialog. >>>> *The >>>> remote target MUST be set to the URI from the Contact header field of the >>>> response.* >>>> >>>> This is what the carrier's SBC gets wrong. It doesn't address your >>>> Asterisk but instead addresses your Kamailio, although the Contact of your >>>> 200 OK (hopefully) contains the Asterisk IP. >>>> >>>> Please verify that your 200 OK going to the carrier actually does carry >>>> a Contact header with the Asterisk IP, but if it does, section 12.1.2 of >>>> the SIP RfC could help when arguing with the carrier. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Sebastian >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 > >
_______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users