Re: ERROR 483 too many hops
Kai Dupke <kdupke-IBi9RG/[email protected]> Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:05:10 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.siproxd |
|---|---|
| Organization | SUSE Linux GmbH |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 11/14/2017 10:42 PM, Kai Dupke wrote: > I looked into the dumps and what I get is > > TK.5062 > siproxd.5060: SIP: OPTIONS sip:kai@voip SIP/2.0 > siproxd.5060 > TK.5062: SIP: SIP/2.0 483 Too Many Hops > > The dumps show the telephone system sends with "Max-Forwards:0" which is > rejected by siproxd for obvious reasons. Never believe in something that looks obvious. RFC3261: The target of the OPTIONS request is identified by the Request-URI, which could identify another UA or a SIP server. If the OPTIONS is addressed to a proxy server, the Request-URI is set without a user part, similar to the way a Request-URI is set for a REGISTER request. Alternatively, a server receiving an OPTIONS request with a *Max- Forwards* header field value of 0 *MAY* respond to the request regardless of the Request-URI. So, it looks like the phone system tries to get some data from the proxy, by setting max-forward to zero. Not sure if the 'may' in the RFC could be answered by the 483 siproxd sends or if this is a bug in siproxd handling of the OPTIONS message. Does siproxd implements options handling at all (not forwarding an options message, but answering a dedicated request via options message to the proxy)? However, this might explains why it still is working, as the answer is optional, even I doubt optional is same as 483. Best regards, kai ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot