[OpenSIPS-Users] multiple Via headers separated by comma

Josip Djuricic josip.djuricic at voljatel.hr
Tue Dec 22 13:00:58 CET 2009


I have attached it, it's from tcpdump, If you want I can catch it with some
other method?

Best regards,

Josip

Session Initiation Protocol
    Request-Line: BYE sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.43:5060;transport=UDP SIP/2.0
        Method: BYE
        Request-URI: sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.43:5060;transport=UDP
            Request-URI Host Part: xxx.xxx.xxx.43
            Request-URI Host Port: 5060
        [Resent Packet: False]
    Message Header
        Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
xxx.xxx.xxx.137:22225;branch=z9hG4bK390a025bb61a5f010a79a7f549f2d743;rport
            Transport: UDP
            Sent-by Address: xxx.xxx.xxx.137
            Sent-by port: 22225
            Branch: z9hG4bK390a025bb61a5f010a79a7f549f2d743
            RPort: rport
        Max-Forwards: 70
        From:
<sip:48521230886 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137>;tag=3776893de6f572f632b05e83485f9dd2
            SIP from address: sip:48521230886 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137
                SIP from address User Part: 48521230886
                SIP from address Host Part: xxx.xxx.xxx.137
            SIP tag: 3776893de6f572f632b05e83485f9dd2
        To: <sip:48521289383 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137>;tag=6774SIPpTag011
            SIP to address: sip:48521289383 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137
                SIP to address User Part: 48521289383
                SIP to address Host Part: xxx.xxx.xxx.137
            SIP tag: 6774SIPpTag011
        Call-ID: 1-3241 at xxx.xxx.xxx.41-b2b_1
        CSeq: 201 BYE
            Sequence Number: 201
            Method: BYE
        Contact: Anonymous <sip:48521230886 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137:22225>
            Contact Binding: Anonymous
<sip:48521230886 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137:22225>
                URI: Anonymous <sip:48521230886 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137:22225>
                    SIP Display info: Anonymous 
                    SIP contact address:
sip:48521230886 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137:22225
        User-Agent: Voljatel B2BUA (RADIUS)
        cisco-GUID: 415033116-94487149-3088500870-2308033284
            [Expert Info (Note/Undecoded): Unrecognised SIP header
(cisco-GUID)]
                [Message: Unrecognised SIP header (cisco-GUID)]
                [Severity level: Note]
                [Group: Undecoded]
        h323-conf-id: 415033116-94487149-3088500870-2308033284
            [Expert Info (Note/Undecoded): Unrecognised SIP header
(h323-conf-id)]
                [Message: Unrecognised SIP header (h323-conf-id)]
                [Severity level: Note]
                [Group: Undecoded]
        Content-Length: 0


Session Initiation Protocol
    Status-Line: SIP/2.0 200 OK
        Status-Code: 200
        [Resent Packet: False]
    Message Header
        To: <sip:48521289383 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137>;tag=6774SIPpTag011
            SIP to address: sip:48521289383 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137
                SIP to address User Part: 48521289383
                SIP to address Host Part: xxx.xxx.xxx.137
            SIP tag: 6774SIPpTag011
        From:
<sip:48521230886 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137>;tag=3776893de6f572f632b05e83485f9dd2
            SIP from address: sip:48521230886 at xxx.xxx.xxx.137
                SIP from address User Part: 48521230886
                SIP from address Host Part: xxx.xxx.xxx.137
            SIP tag: 3776893de6f572f632b05e83485f9dd2
        Call-ID: 1-3241 at xxx.xxx.xxx.41-b2b_1
        CSeq: 201 BYE
            Sequence Number: 201
            Method: BYE
        Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
xxx.xxx.xxx.137:22225;branch=z9hG4bK390a025bb61a5f010a79a7f549f2d743;rport
            Transport: UDP
            Sent-by Address: xxx.xxx.xxx.137
            Sent-by port: 22225
            Branch: z9hG4bK390a025bb61a5f010a79a7f549f2d743
            RPort: rport
        Server: SIPP
        Content-Length: 0


-----Original Message-----
From: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org
[mailto:users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] On Behalf Of Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 11:53 AM
To: OpenSIPS users mailling list
Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] multiple Via headers separated by comma

Hi Josip,

Post both the BYE (sent out by opesips) and 200 OK (received by 
opensips)  in plain text .

Regards,
Bogdan

Josip Djuricic wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thanks very much for your quick answer, I understand that by rfc it is
> completely valid.
>
> What I can't seem to find is why is my last 200 OK from uas not beeing
> matched against the BYE that opensips forwarded to uas. So after uas sends
> 200 OK, it keeps receiveing BYE until timeout occurs. It only happens with
> sipp, if using any other uac everything works as expected. Every other
> transaction is matched correctly.
>
> I'm includig siplog from that last message, with changed ip's.
>
> Perhaps you would see this problem more clearly?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Josip
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org
> [mailto:users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Pogrebennyk
> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 10:44 AM
> To: OpenSIPS users mailling list
> Subject: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] multiple Via headers separated by comma
>
> Josip Djuricic wrote:
>   
>> Transaction is not matched if request is sent with 2 or more multiline
via
>> headers and response is received with via header in one line separated by
>> comma?
>>     
>
> Josip,
> This is absolutely legal if multiple values are combined in one line 
> separated by comma. Ccheck RFC 3261 for multiple header field values 
> combining.
>
> Section 7.3.
>     [H4.2] also specifies that multiple header fields of the same field
>     name whose value is a comma-separated list can be combined into one
>     header field.  That applies to SIP as well, but the specific rule is
>     different because of the different grammars.  Specifically, any SIP
>     header whose grammar is of the form
>
>        header  =  "header-name" HCOLON header-value *(COMMA header-value)
>
>     allows for combining header fields of the same name into a comma-
>     separated list.  The Contact header field allows a comma-separated
>     list unless the header field value is "*".
>
> Response is matched to request using branch parameter from uppermost Via 
> header, so I don't know why RFC compliant implementation would have 
> problems with response matching when Via header is combined.
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


-- 
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
www.voice-system.ro


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users at lists.opensips.org
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users




More information about the Users mailing list