[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0011058]: Asterisk doesn't recognize a "408 Request Timeout"

[noreply at bugs.digium.com]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=11058 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                ibc
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   11058
Category:                   Channels/chan_sip/Interoperability
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   major
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     new
Asterisk Version:           1.4.13  
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): N/A  
SVN Revision (number only!):  
Disclaimer on File?:        N/A 
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             10-23-2007 04:57 CDT
Last Modified:              10-23-2007 08:26 CDT
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    Asterisk doesn't recognize a "408 Request Timeout"
Description: 
If Asterisk calls a SIP user and receives from him a "480 User not
responding" Asterisk hangups the call OK.

But in my case Asterisk calls a SIP user registered in a OpenSer, and this
OpenSer cancels not responding calls after 60 seconds and replies with a
"408 Request Timeout", but Asterisk ignores this reply and doesn't send the
ACK. So the channel remains open.

About "408 Request Timeout" RFC 3261 says:

    21.4.9 408 Request Timeout

     The server could not produce a response within a suitable amount of
     time, for example, if it could not determine the location of the
user
     in time.  The client MAY repeat the request without modifications at
     any later time.

I think Asterik should accept a "408" and terminate the call.
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 ibc - 10-23-07 08:26  
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
I think I've detected the problem, is "pedantic=yes" and To_tag headers
related:

I use "pedantic=yes" and because OpenSer allow pararell forking the
replies generated by OpenSer (as this 408) have a new To_tag different from
any To_Tag of previous responses (180) of ringing clients.

The same occurs with CANCEL. I reported this bug in OpenSer but it seems
to be related to this same issue: the To_tag in "pedantic" mode:
 
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1818469&group_id=139143&atid=743020


So this is not a problem with 408 reply, but with TO_tag in pedantic mode. 

Issue History 
Date Modified   Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
10-23-07 08:26  ibc            Note Added: 0072404                          
======================================================================