> Now I can hackishly fix it with a rewritehostport in the middle. But that
> > will eventually not scale up that nicely. Ergo, does anyone have a good
> idea
> > on how to e.g. have Kamailio in this situation ignore the first uri in
> the
> > route header? Or am I still not getting it :) ?
>
> y
davy van de moere writes:
> Imho Kamailio does what it is supposed to do, it forwards the packet to the
> first element in the Route header.
yes.
> But as I received the BYE packet from , that one should have
> stripped itself out of the Route header, making everything just work,
> right?
yes,
Owki, reading RFC-3261 again ;)
Imho Kamailio does what it is supposed to do, it forwards the packet to the
first element in the Route header.
But as I received the BYE packet from , that one should have
stripped itself out of the Route header, making everything just work, right?
Now I can hack
2011/10/11 davy van de moere :
> IMHO if I could convince Kamailio to always take the last part of the Route
> header into account and ignore the first one it would correctly work. What
> would be a good approach? Rewriting the route header looks abit harsch.
That does not make sense at all. The o
I'm trying to integrate to an integrics enswitch, almost everything works
like a charm, except on BYE packets as Kamailio in my setup forwards these
incorrectly.
Digging somewhat I believe the culprit sits in the Route header which comes
from the enswitch:
Route:
,
Kamailio takes into account th
