[Sip] Request URI and TO heasder "user" part is different
Nitin Kapoor <nitinkapoorr@gmail.com> Thu, 18 March 2010 14:41 UTC
Return-Path: <nitinkapoorr@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id 2D5863A6C13 for <sip@core3.amsl.com>;
Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:41:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.237
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.237 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.828,
BAYES_20=-0.74, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
J_CHICKENPOX_37=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_62=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id achfbwKXwAv0 for
<sip@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pw0-f44.google.com (mail-pw0-f44.google.com
[209.85.160.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D96A3A6C19 for
<sip@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pwi10 with SMTP id 10so340205pwi.31 for <sip@ietf.org>;
Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:41:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject
:from:to:content-type; bh=vEZO2GDuP694lkhwJpUdpr7reOoSI6vLZ3Ky59CdEvo=;
b=FuSS9b1Jp4XkYSmlZAXKKbzAM3YlE7JbGM3bysmwJoUUUKVhue4kF9dZsinBAPt2yR
Xh52j8DttwAbiHLVUIA+mSINa45Er9m2P6t1jSE7WaznBY7kERnKf2A9Pmp1tk4wpBHz
yN5DVw/oLh0WVGlJo6uIUtCQ4lEi4Ugjb6n/o=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
b=tWTrDAEjCSMnyE8Fw662j3zjYrP9ACYV39Ul7zJshhbFBCpfDObgEiEDT2YvAoT5+l
9eyKILGhc9bD9V7bU+/aVv/hzoHbGsQ0Ifa7xA2YCUYDC8H6VNSCaoiZkHqRpKRZSggL
Cy6Hg/GH8/JbsvoQRMreIk2jEQBmUlxzzbIRc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.210.17 with SMTP id i17mr1330277wfg.146.1268923293727;
Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:41:33 -0400
Message-ID: <c80c92d1003180741s31691d6cg7d7f41ebe8bd2c6f@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nitin Kapoor <nitinkapoorr@gmail.com>
To: sip@ietf.org, sip-implementors@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd32ed62b80ea0482143a03
Subject: [Sip] Request URI and TO heasder "user" part is different
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,
<mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>,
<mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:41:31 -0000
Hello, I have the scenario where the call is coming to SBC from my source UA and then I am forwarding the same call to redirect server to route the call. Here is the scenario. 1) Call come to my source UA and then I forwarded the call to redirect server with below REQUEST uri. Request-Line: INVITE sip:17139229867@208.70.157.43<sip%3A17139229867@208.70.157.43>;user=phone SIP/2.0 Request-URI: sip:17139229867@208.70.157.43 <sip%3A17139229867@208.70.157.43> ;user=phone To: sip:17139229867@208.70.157.43 <sip%3A17139229867@208.70.157.43> ;user=phone From: "Joe Gonzales" <sip:2816524888@64.124.207.220<sip%3A2816524888@64.124.207.220> ;user=phone>;tag=3477742912-272141 Contact: <sip:2816524888@64.124.207.220:5060;user=phone;tgrp=100054CUST> 2) Now from here my *redirect server* replied me with below uri in TO & FROM, but will multiple CONTACT header and on which I have the first CONTACT user part is with “1” and the others all are same but carry the “1” with rest of the user part. IP/2.0 300 Redirect To: <sip:17139229867@208.70.157.43 <sip%3A17139229867@208.70.157.43> ;user=phone>;tag=a667a4b9fa6bfa35b From: "Joe Gonzales" <sip:2816524888@64.124.207.220<sip%3A2816524888@64.124.207.220> ;user=phone>;tag=3477742912-272141 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 64.124.207.220:5060 ;branch=z9hG4bKb96ce5413fe01d59101005f4ae3881c6 Contact: <sip:7139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A7139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202583VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202393VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202562VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202405VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202163VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202203VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202525VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=201030VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202330VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202206VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202329VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=201906VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=201908VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=201907VEND>, sip:17139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A17139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=201905VEND> 3)However after sending the ACK my server again sent the another invite to my vendor with below REQUEST URI with “1” whereas in first CONTACT header from redirect was not carrying the “1” Contact: sip:7139229867@64.124.207.220 <sip%3A7139229867@64.124.207.220> ;dtg=202583VEND. Request-Line: INVITE sip:17139229867@64.245.120.88<sip%3A17139229867@64.245.120.88>SIP/2.0 Request-URI: sip:17139229867@64.245.120.88 <sip%3A17139229867@64.245.120.88> Whereby in TO header(of the same INVITE) I do not have the “1” in user part as below. To: sip:7139229867@64.245.120.88 <sip%3A7139229867@64.245.120.88> Contact: sip:64.124.207.220:5060;tgrp=100054CUST And because of this my vendor is sending immediate 502 REJECTED. Status-Line: SIP/2.0 502 Rejected - Called number is not NATNUM Could anyone please help me on this, whether it is a correct or not,because as far as I know he user part of the Request uri would be checked first. User part of the Request uri is valid but the To header is different from Request uri so now a validation for the User part of the To header will be performed and if the user part is found to be invalid then a 404 (Not Found) response should sent back. Thanks, Nitin Kapoor
- [Sip] Request URI and TO heasder "user" part is d… Nitin Kapoor
- Re: [Sip] [Sip-implementors] Request URI and TO h… WORLEY, DALE R (DALE)
- Re: [Sip] [Sip-implementors] Request URI and TO h… Nitin Kapoor
- Re: [Sip] [Sip-implementors] Request URI and TO h… WORLEY, DALE R (DALE)
- Re: [Sip] [Sip-implementors] Request URI and TO h… Nitin Kapoor