[OpenSIPS-Users] Request-Disposition: no-fork
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
bogdan at opensips.org
Tue Oct 11 08:55:51 UTC 2022
Hi Bela,
If the directive is indicated in the INVITE, simply avoid doing any
forking in your cfg, nothing more.
Regards,
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
https://www.opensips-solutions.com
OpenSIPS Summit 27-30 Sept 2022, Athens
https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/
On 10/10/22 10:06 PM, Bela H wrote:
>
> Thanks Bogdan!
>
> However, I am talking about serial forking, call forwarding busy/no
> answer scenario.
>
> Is there a way to avoid that in the cfg without messing up with the to
> tags?
>
> How do I achieve “proxy to only a single address ("no-fork")”?
>
> According to fork-directive in
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3841#section-9.1.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bela
>
> *From: *Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <mailto:bogdan at opensips.org>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, 11 October 2022 01:49
> *To: *OpenSIPS users mailling list <mailto:users at lists.opensips.org>;
> Bela H <mailto:hobe69 at hotmail.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Request-Disposition: no-fork
>
> Hi Bela,
>
> What you are trying to do (messing with the TO-tags) is a bad idea, as
> you will be breaking the upstream parallel forking.
>
> If the GW does not support forking, what you can do is to avoid doing
> parallel forking in your cfg (like when routing to users via lookup).
> You do not need any special support.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
> https://www.opensips-solutions.com <https://www.opensips-solutions.com>
> OpenSIPS Summit 27-30 Sept 2022, Athens
> https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/ <https://www.opensips.org/events/Summit-2022Athens/>
>
> On 9/29/22 7:10 AM, Bela H wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have call forwarding busy/no answer scenario: A number is from a
> gateway, B and C numbers are our own subs.
>
> The gateway is sending us the INVITE message with
> “Request-Disposition: no-fork” header field.
>
> That means we must use one dialog for the mentioned scenario.
>
> Currently the To tag we are sending to the GW in the first 180
> ringing/181 Call is being forwarded messages are different to the
> To tag in the second 180 ringing and 200 OK (SDP).
>
> Gateway OpenSips
>
> INVITE
>
> ------------------------------------------>
>
> 100 GIVING IT A TRY
>
> <-- -----------------------------------------
>
> 180 RINGING
>
> <- -------------------------------------------
>
> 181 CALL IS BEING FORWARDED
>
> <- -------------------------------------------
>
> 180 RINGING
>
> <- -------------------------------------------
>
> 200 OK (SDP)
>
> <- -------------------------------------------
>
> What would be the easiest way from OpenSIPS to send the same To
> tag (it should be the same from the first 180 ringing through to
> the 200 OK) and using one dialog for this scenario?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bela
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Users mailing list
>
> Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users <http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20221011/745d6b52/attachment.html>
More information about the Users
mailing list