On 10/25/10 6:35 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
2010/10/25 Daniel-Constantin Mierla<mico...@gmail.com>:
why are you using "i:1"? The parameter must be just 1.
Sorry, just a typo in the mail :)
, so the bflag will be set
for all the branches that could be generated for this incoming
transaction. This also involves creating new branches manually under
failure_route, am I right?
Note: I do know that it would be much better just to use flag instead of
bflags.
2) The outgoing transaction(s) fail so I enter into failure_route. If
I inspect here bflag(i:1) will it be set or not? I remember that it
will be set.
3) Then I call append_branch in failure_route, or perhaps call
loockup("location") and I expect that all the generated branches will
have the bflag set, am I right?
never used in this way, but the normal usage is per branch and when you do
it in the main route then it is just for first branch.
It's more curiosity than need. But anyhow I'm 90% sure that if you set
a bflag in route then it will be set for all the branches generated
during loockup(location).
Looked in the code and I saw that only first branch inherits the branch
flags from main route, the other takes only the value from location records.
Cheers,
Daniel
Not sure what happens in case of serial
forking using append_branch() in failure_route...
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users@lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
