Doug,
in failure route, the RURI was already consumed (you already got reply
for it) - so, if you want to relay again, you need to append a new branch.
regards,
bogdan
Douglas Garstang wrote:
Bogdan,
I don't understand why I need to do this. Doesn't rewritehostport rewrite the
current URI so that t_relay can statefully deliver? If so, what's the point of
append_branch? It seems redundant, which is why I don't understand the need for
it.
Doug.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 8:47 AM
To: Douglas Garstang
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Users] More Routing....
Hi Doug,
in failure route, in order to fork a new serial branch, you need to call
append_branch() before t_relay().
regards,
bogdan
Douglas Garstang wrote:
Can someone please tell me why the following extremely simple example doesn't
first attempt to relay to 192.168.10.7, and then if that fails, try
192.168.10.8? What am I missing here? The documentation says that t_relay()
simple sends statefully to the current URI.... seems to be what I am doing.
What am I missing? Please help!
route(1);
route[1] {
rewritehostport("192.168.10.7:5060");
t_on_failure("2");
t_relay();
}
failure_route[2] {
rewritehostport('192.168.10.8:5060");
t_relay();
}
Doug.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
