Re: [SR-Users] seturi analog for Kamailio 4.3

2015-03-16 Thread Abdul Gafar
Hello Just modify RURI, t_relay(), and a new branch will automatically be created On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > Are you calling t_relay() from branch_route? > > Maybe you should load debugger module and enable cfgtrace to see what > actions from kamailio.cf

Re: [SR-Users] seturi analog for Kamailio 4.3

2015-03-16 Thread Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Are you calling t_relay() from branch_route? Maybe you should load debugger module and enable cfgtrace to see what actions from kamailio.cfg are executed. Just changing the $ru and relaying should work when used in request_route. Cheers, Daniel On 16/03/15 14:14, Yuriy Gorlichenko wrote: > I me

Re: [SR-Users] seturi analog for Kamailio 4.3

2015-03-16 Thread Yuriy Gorlichenko
I mean that algorithm of creating new headers of creating INVOTE message is the same for branch_branch route and single client. Only one difference i that I use $ru="sip:"+$tU+"@"+$(du{s.select,1,:} vs append_branch("sip:$tU@ $(du{s.select,1,:})") This is full algo of my reqest the first is I chec

Re: [SR-Users] seturi analog for Kamailio 4.3

2015-03-16 Thread Yuriy Gorlichenko
request_route 2015-03-16 15:43 GMT+03:00 Daniel-Constantin Mierla : > Is this used in request_route or in failure_route or other routing block? > > Cheers, > Daniel > > > On 16/03/15 12:44, Yuriy Gorlichenko wrote: > > If I use > > $ru="sip:"+$tU+"@"+$(du{s.select,1,:}); > > if (!t_relay()) { >

Re: [SR-Users] seturi analog for Kamailio 4.3

2015-03-16 Thread Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Is this used in request_route or in failure_route or other routing block? Cheers, Daniel On 16/03/15 12:44, Yuriy Gorlichenko wrote: > If I use > > $ru="sip:"+$tU+"@"+$(du{s.select,1,:}); > > if (!t_relay()) { > sl_reply_error(); > } > > I see > > t_forward_nonack(): ERROR: t_forward_nonack: no

Re: [SR-Users] seturi analog for Kamailio 4.3

2015-03-16 Thread Yuriy Gorlichenko
If I use $ru="sip:"+$tU+"@"+$(du{s.select,1,:}); if (!t_relay()) { sl_reply_error(); } I see t_forward_nonack(): ERROR: t_forward_nonack: no branches for forwarding Mar 16 11:36:04 Kamailio kamailio[4335]: ERROR: sl [sl_funcs.c:363]: sl_reply_error(): ERROR: sl_reply_error used: I'm terribly so

Re: [SR-Users] seturi analog for Kamailio 4.3

2015-03-16 Thread Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Hello, instead of seturi use: $ru = "sip:" + $tU + "@" + $(du{s.select,1,:}); Cheers, Daniel On 16/03/15 05:44, Yuriy Gorlichenko wrote: > Now. when I use > > seturi("sip:$tU@$(du{s.select,1,:})"); > > I see error at my log > > ERROR: tm [t_lookup.c:1264]: new_t(): ERROR: new_t: uri invalid >

Re: [SR-Users] seturi analog for Kamailio 4.3

2015-03-15 Thread Yuriy Gorlichenko
Now. when I use seturi("sip:$tU@$(du{s.select,1,:})"); I see error at my log ERROR: tm [t_lookup.c:1264]: new_t(): ERROR: new_t: uri invalid ERROR: tm [t_lookup.c:1411]: t_newtran(): ERROR: t_newtran: new_t failed ERROR: tm [t_lookup.c:1264]: new_t(): ERROR: new_t: uri invalid ERROR: tm [t_l

[SR-Users] seturi analog for Kamailio 4.3

2015-03-15 Thread Yuriy Gorlichenko
Hello. I try to call multi[ple endpoints from my server using append_branch. It works fine but when I have only one endpoint - kamailio generate 2 INVITE requests to it. As I understand it is original request and the next one is branch. I used seturi() before for sending original reqest to destinat