Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote: > 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.
Agreed, but I think the more harmless approach would be for the To tag issue to be ignored by the proxy and passed to the receiving UA to deal with. >> 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. Well, true. I meant a stateless vs. stateful CANCEL -- which also changes the domain destination of the RURI. -- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
