Hello,

what function are you using inside kamailio.cfg to send the 202? Iirc, m_store() doesn't send anything internally, it is done via config. Be sure you use send_reply() or t_reply() inside the failure route block.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 22/06/14 23:32, Allen Zhang wrote:

Hi Daniel,

R sent 408 because the recipient was REGISTERed but the testing device had a power failure and hence couldn’t receive the MESSAGE.

After it timed out,  m_store() was called in the failure route.

So the sequence is:

MESSAGE delivery failed because device powered off

R timed out the request

R send 408

In R’s failure route

R calls m_store()

MESSAGE stored

R send 202

Did I do something wrong?

Cheers,

Allen

*From:*sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org] *On Behalf Of *Daniel-Constantin Mierla
*Sent:* Friday, 20 June 2014 5:37 p.m.
*To:* Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
*Subject:* Re: [SR-Users] kamailio not sending 202 after 408 is sent

Hello,

why is R sending the 408? You should catch it there in a failure route, or where do you execute m_store() inside R config?

Cheers,
Daniel

On 20/06/14 07:20, Allen Zhang wrote:

    Hi all,

    I have an edge proxy (E) and a registrar (R) behind it.

    In R, if a MESSAGE failed to deliver for any reason, R stores the
    MESSAGE in msilo.

    If the MESSAGE timed out, R sends a 408 time out first and then
    send a 202 Accepted after the MESSAGE is stored.

    The problem is, E happily forwards the 408 to the sender of the
    MESSAGE, but decides not to forward the 202.

    The log:

    DEBUG: t_reply_matching: hash 16662 label 0 branch 0

    DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1032]: DEBUG: t_reply_matching: reply
    matched (T=0x7f99eebb2ae0)!

    DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1164]: DEBUG: t_check_msg: msg id=3 global
    id=3 T end=0x7f99eebb2ae0

    DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:2085]: DEBUG: reply_received: org. status
    uas=408, uac[0]=408 local=0 is_invite=0)

    DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:1207]: ->>>>>>>>> T_code=408, new_code=202

    DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:1706]: DEBUG: relay_reply: branch=0, save=0,
    relay=-1

    Can I change this behaviour to also forward the 202 withouting
    hacking in the source code?

    Regards,

    Allen



--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

_______________________________________________
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

Reply via email to