[OpenSIPS-Users] NAT: Why replacing "Contact" with the received public IP:port instead of adding a parameter with it?

[Klaus Darilion]

Iñaki Baz Castillo schrieb:
> 2008/11/7 Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at>:
>> Hi Inaki!
>>
>> Funny - I am thinking of this since long time and had exactly the same idea
>> yesterday, except that:
> 
>>  - I would name the function add_received_to_contact()
> 
> yeah!
> 
> 
>>  - I thought of searching for "received" not in t_relay but during
>> loose_route() (by design the received param can only be in loose-routed
>> messages and this allows overriding $du manuall)
> 
> True, loose_route() could set $du with that parameter when present.
> 
> 
>>  - remove the receive param from RURI before forwarding (although it is
>> allowed by RFC 3261, maybe make this optional)
> 
> Yes, good idea. If not, the UA will receive a RURI with a URI
> parameter that it didn't include (maybe it could refuse it?).

That was also my fear. But I checked RFC 3261 and is says for URI 
comparison that parameters which are present only in one URI should be 
ignored, thus the client should accept the URI also with the received 
parameter. But this can done configureable

klaus