Hi, I referred to the totag. Sorry if I mistook it for to field.
regards Ganesh Kumar On 10/14/16, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <mico...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > > On 14/10/16 10:25, Infinicalls Infinicalls wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 10/13/16, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <mico...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Can you split the IF with t_load_contacts () || t_next_contacts () in >>> two >>> to see which one fails? >> After splitting, I get this error. >> >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: DEBUG: >> siputils [checks.c:97]: has_totag(): no totag >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: DEBUG: tm >> [t_lookup.c:1011]: t_check_msg(): DEBUG: t_check_msg: msg id=2 global >> id=1 T start=(nil) >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: DEBUG: tm >> [t_lookup.c:466]: t_lookup_request(): t_lookup_request: start >> searching: hash=9175, isACK=0 >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: DEBUG: tm >> [t_lookup.c:424]: matching_3261(): DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matching >> failed >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: DEBUG: tm >> [t_lookup.c:648]: t_lookup_request(): DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no >> transaction found >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: DEBUG: tm >> [t_lookup.c:1080]: t_check_msg(): DEBUG: t_check_msg: msg id=2 global >> id=2 T end=(nil) >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: DEBUG: >> registrar [lookup.c:240]: lookup_helper(): contact for [balaji] found >> by address >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: DEBUG: >> <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:453]: get_path_dst_uri(): path for branch: >> '<sip:10.1.0.4;lr>' >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: DEBUG: tm >> [t_serial.c:455]: t_next_contacts(): no contacts in contacts_avp - we >> are done! >> Oct 14 08:14:01 infinicalls /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[35289]: ERROR: >> <script>: t_next_contacts() failed >> >> The other one doesn't fail. And also, as the logs say, the "to" field >> is also empty in the SIP requests. Any idea what went wrong? >> > Which message says that to field is empty? Or do you refer to the to-tag? > > Cheers, > Daniel > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla > http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda > Kamailio Advanced Training, Berlin, Oct 24-26, 2016 - http://www.asipto.com > > -- --- http://www.infinicalls.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
