-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 84
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
dialog: fix rtags of forking INVITE with 100rel #947
Conversation
19b4512
to
9d83c63
Compare
src/sip/dialog.c
Outdated
renc.end = 0; | ||
|
||
err |= sip_msg_hdr_apply(msg, msg->req, SIP_HDR_RECORD_ROUTE, | ||
record_route_handler, &renc) ? ENOMEM : 0; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thats looks a bit strange to me. If record_route_handler
returns true, ENOMEM
should returned?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Absolutely, thanks. I will still clean this up a bit, hence the draft status. I wanted to make use of the GitHub workflows to make sure the test I wrote also works on other platforms.
9d83c63
to
5ea9542
Compare
5ea9542
to
caa7435
Compare
I had to remove the new test for retest as I was not able to write a test that would properly simulate a forked INVITE. Instead, I tested it with a SIPP scenario and the PRACKs now have the correct tags. Other than that the behavior of re stays the same regarding forked INVITES. I.e. only the first 2XX response is ACKed, subsequent ones are ignored. |
See baresip/baresip#2114.