Skip to content
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

[BUG] Dialog callbacks not being called for reply in early dialog #3366

Open
tijmenNL opened this issue Apr 12, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

[BUG] Dialog callbacks not being called for reply in early dialog #3366

tijmenNL opened this issue Apr 12, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@tijmenNL
Copy link

OpenSIPS version you are running

1.11+git20170503.d3782be,  but probably still present/applies to current trunk

Describe the bug

SDP address is not rewritten by Mediaproxy in a 200 OK for UPDATE (early dialog) before 200 OK for INVITE in the following flow for a call with 100rel enabled:

...
caller <- 183 with early media (callee)
caller -> PRACK
caller <- 200 OK for PRACK
caller <- UPDATE (with SDP, address gets rewritten)
caller -> 200 OK for UPDATE (with SDP, address is not rewritten)
caller <- 200 OK for INVITE
caller -> ACK
...

To Reproduce
Follow the above scenario

Expected behavior
The mediaproxy module subscribes to DLGCB_RESPONSE_FWDED | DLGCB_RESPONSE_WITHIN and neither is called for the 200 OK for UPDATE in early dialog. In the 'normal' OpenSIPS logic we get to the dialog reply route.

I checked with full debug mode on and I don't see DBG:dialog:run_dlg_callbacks in this case.

On the 200 OK for INVITE I see:
DBG:dialog:push_reply_in_dialog: 0x7f10b9021280 totag in rpl is <127.0.0.1alUtKGp-08100+1+70bc00b2+c2592c3> (41)
..
DBG:dialog:run_dlg_callbacks: dialog=0x7f10b9021280, type=256

Relevant System Logs

OS/environment information

  • Operating System: Debian 10
@tijmenNL tijmenNL changed the title [BUG] Dialog callbacks not being called in early dialog [BUG] Dialog callbacks not being called for reply in early dialog Apr 12, 2024
@bogdan-iancu
Copy link
Member

Is an UPDATE (sequential request) legal in early state ??

@tijmenNL
Copy link
Author

tijmenNL commented Apr 25, 2024

I think so.

See https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3311#section-5.1 and https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3311#section-8 the example. However in the case I have the callee sends the UPDATE, not the caller like in the example

@tijmenNL
Copy link
Author

tijmenNL commented May 3, 2024

Copy link

Any updates here? No progress has been made in the last 15 days, marking as stale. Will close this issue if no further updates are made in the next 30 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label May 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants