Yes, they are identical in every way except for the .1 and .2 branch IDs. Daniel-Constantin Mierla <mico...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hello, > >I don't recall any change in this aspect, are the two branches going to > >same destination? > >Cheers, >Daniel > >On 5/13/13 2:43 PM, Alex Balashov wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Has something changed about default forking behaviour in >= 4.0? >> >> I have a scenario where INVITEs processed by the proxy first hit a >> redirect server, catch a 302, and then append another branch and >> iterate over one or more outbound routes. >> >> In the past, this worked fine. After I upgraded to 4.0, I am seeing >> two branches at a time on the outbound routes, after the initial >> branch to the redirect server. The desired behaviour is serial >> forking at all times. >> >> tm:failure_reply_mode is set to 3, as it always has been. >> >> Any ideas would be appreciated; thank you! >> >> -- Alex >> -- Sent from my mobile, and thus lacking in the refinement one might expect from a fully fledged keyboard. Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 235 E Ponce de Leon Ave Suite 106 Decatur, GA 30030 United States Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com _______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
