[OpenSIPS-Users] engage_rtp_proxy()

[Sasmita Panda]

Yes . This should happen . But I don't know the exact problem . What I
explain is the way we are using rtpproxy .
This is clearly mention in the document also .. You can go through
opensips.org

This is what we are doing .  Rest I am not an expertise in opensips .

route {
...
    if (is_method("INVITE")) {
        if (has_body("application/sdp")) {
            if (rtpproxy_offer())
                t_on_reply("1");
        } else {
            t_on_reply("2");
        }
    }
    if (is_method("ACK") && has_body("application/sdp"))
        rtpproxy_answer();
...
}

onreply_route[1]
{
...
    if (has_body("application/sdp"))
        rtpproxy_answer();
...
}

onreply_route[2]
{
...
    if (has_body("application/sdp"))
        rtpproxy_offer();
...
}


*Thanks & Regards*
*Sasmita Panda*
*Network Testing and Software Engineer*
*3CLogic , ph:07827611765*

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Max Mühlbronner <mm at 42com.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> @Miha: Are you sure that it does not automatically set the rtpproxies for
> 200OK & ACK?
>
> @Sasmita: According to the documentation it is not necessary to invoke
> engage_rtp_proxy() for replies as this is handled by the dialog module.
>
>
> "Function must only be called for the initial INVITE and internally takes
> care of rewriting the body of 200 OKs and ACKs. "
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
> Max M.
>
>
> On 31.05.2016 14:42, Miha wrote:
>
> @Sasmita, totally clear :)
>
> I asked wrong question :)
>
>
> What is the difference between using engage_rtp_proxy() or using
> rtpproxy_offer(), rtpproxy_answer()?
>
>
> tnx
>
> miha
>
>
> On 31/05/2016 14:39, Sasmita Panda wrote:
>
>         If you are using in INVITE , then it should be offer . Because
> firstly we are offering media to someone . If its 200 Ok then it will be
> answer because the 2nd party is answering the call .
>
>       If there is no sdp in INVITE but in ACK , then it will get reversed
> . In 200 OK you should offer and in ACK you have to answer .
> This can be done in loop .
>
>      I hope I make you understand .
>
> */Thanks & Regards/*
> /Sasmita Panda/
> /Network Testing and Software Engineer/
> /3CLogic , ph:07827611765/
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Miha <miha at softnet.si
> <mailto:miha at softnet.si> <miha at softnet.si>> wrote:
>
>     ok tnx. I understand documentation on wrong way.
>
>     But then, what is the difference with  using rtpproxy offer, answer ?
>
>
>     br
>
>     mia
>
>
>     On 31/05/2016 14:17, Sasmita Panda wrote:
>
>     If there is sdp in ACK and u wanted to engage rtp proxy , the
>      you have to write it inside ACK also ... By writing for INVITE
>     cant help you to update ACK also . For 200 OK , you must write it
>     in reply route .
>
>     */Thanks & Regards/*
>     /Sasmita Panda/
>     /Network Testing and Software Engineer/
>     /3CLogic , ph:07827611765/
>
>     On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Johan De Clercq
>     <johan at democon.be <mailto:johan at democon.be> <johan at democon.be>>
> wrote:
>
>         put it also in reply route.
>
>         2016-05-31 13:42 GMT+02:00 Miha <miha at softnet.si
>         <mailto:miha at softnet.si> <miha at softnet.si>>:
>
>             HI
>
>             if I use engage_rtp_proxy(), I can use it only on initial
>             INVITE and opensips should automatically rewritten also
>             200 OK and ACK with SDP, right?
>             But when I am using this function, I can see from trace
>             that only SDP for initial invite is rewritten, 200 ok
>             with sdp is not changed. Must I do something else?
>
>             Rtpproxy is not running in bridge mode.
>
>
>             tnx
>             miha
>
>
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             Users mailing list
>             Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
> <Users at lists.opensips.org>
>             http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Users mailing list
>         Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
> <Users at lists.opensips.org>
>         http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Users mailing list
>     Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
> <Users at lists.opensips.org>
>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Users mailing list
>     Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
> <Users at lists.opensips.org>
>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing listUsers at lists.opensips.orghttp://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20160531/aa3c42e5/attachment.htm>