2009/5/11 Alex Balashov <abalas...@evaristesys.com>: > It sounds like the CANCEL with the To-tag should have a Route header as > well in order for it to be processed like any other sequential/in-dialog > request -- that is to say, under loose_route().
But it would be incorrect anyway. A CANCEL for an initial-INVITE shouldn't have To tag since the CANCEL must end the whole UAC transaction, not just an early-dialog. > Or, the CANCEL is intended for OpenSIPS itself, in which case it should > not have a To-tag. The CANCEL is always for OpenSIPS since CANCEL is hop by hop. > I would not try to accommodate this broken UA if I were you. When > breakage is so fundamental, this way lies madness. I agree. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <i...@aliax.net> _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
