Hi, On 03/28/2012 06:37 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: > 2012/3/28 Min Wang <ser.ba...@gmail.com>: >> In order to properly proxy the msg to GW1, Kamailio seems need to change the >> to tag from B to A. > > Totally wrong. Multiple (early-)dialogs are 100% valid according to > RFC 3261. If you find some SIP device failing when it receives > multiple 180/183/200 responses with different To-tag, then drop it
I recently learned that for example Siemens switches implement "Request Disposition: no-fork" defined in http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3841.txt, and if for some reason you decide to fork nonetheless on your side, you'd probably want to do something about the different to-tags (although you're violating against that specific RFC then). No idea how such a device would react to not getting a to-tag at all by stripping it out as Klaus suggested in another response, but at least that Siemens switch doesn't bail out on getting different to-tags in provisional replies. Andreas
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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
