And specifically, the ambiguity I am referring to in your narrative is the following:
1) In your first reply to me after I posted the configs, you said: "Your config is bogus. You are not doing proper record-routing (you commented out that section). In-dialog requests are matched during record-route handling, regardless of the dialog match mode." 2) In your subsequent reply to yourself and clarification of the issue with reference to the dialog docs, you say: "The documentation is a little bit fuzzy about this, but here's the hint: http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/1.4.x/dialog#id2507978 http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/1.4.x/dialog#id2508031 <quote> This PV will be available only for sequential requests, after doing loose_route(). </quote> So it means that you must perform loose_route() if you want to catch in-dialog request and have a consistent dialog state. With your config, all the dialogs will just time out ..." 3) So, which one is it? If I need to record_route(), that is obvious; you cannot monitor dialogs if subsequent in-dialog requests do not pass through the proxy. I am doing that. If it is loose_route() that I need to correlate subsequent in-dialog requests, why? As you said, if no RR cookies are being used, why should the proxy care about the Route: header? Thanks, -- Alex Ovidiu Sas wrote: > The cookie attribute is not used at all in mode 2. Inspect your > traffic and you will see that there are no rr coockes and the dialog > matching is working ok (in mode 2). > The record-route mechanism is used as a _hook_ by the dialog module to > intercept in dialog requests. I don't know how to put this better in > words ... > Hope that this clarifies your dialog matching issue. > > So ... the dlg_match_mode works as advertised in the doc as long as > you have a proper implementation of the record rote mechanism. > For mode 0 and 1 you will have cookies in the Record-Route headers. > For mode 2 you will have no cookies in the Record-Route headers and > the matching will still work. > > > Regards, > Ovidiu Sas > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Alex Balashov > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Yep. That was the conclusion I came to as well; even though >> dlg_match_mode insinuates that the cookie attribute is optional, >> implying there are other ways to match subsequent requests as well, >> it is actually not. >> >> On Thu, October 16, 2008 1:45 pm, Ovidiu Sas wrote: >>>> That was the topic of my original post: how to correlate dialogs purely >>>> based on SIP attributes without the use of loose-routing. >>> short answer: you can't (and the matching method doesn't matter). >>> proper loose-routing is a must. >>> >> >> -- >> Alex Balashov >> Evariste Systems >> Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ >> Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 >> Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 >> Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 >> >> -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (706) 338-8599 _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.kamailio.org http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
