[asterisk-commits] mmichelson: branch 1.6.1 r187495 - in /branches/1.6.1: ./ channels/chan_sip.c

[SVN commits to the Asterisk project]

Author: mmichelson
Date: Thu Apr  9 14:14:38 2009
New Revision: 187495

URL: http://svn.digium.com/svn-view/asterisk?view=rev&rev=187495
Log:
Merged revisions 187488 via svnmerge from 
https://origsvn.digium.com/svn/asterisk/trunk

................
  r187488 | mmichelson | 2009-04-09 13:58:41 -0500 (Thu, 09 Apr 2009) | 24 lines
  
  Merged revisions 187484 via svnmerge from 
  https://origsvn.digium.com/svn/asterisk/branches/1.4
  
  ........
    r187484 | mmichelson | 2009-04-09 13:51:20 -0500 (Thu, 09 Apr 2009) | 18 lines
    
    Handle a SIP race condition (reinvite before an ACK) properly.
    
    RFC 5047 explains the proper course of action to take if a 
    reINVITE is received before the ACK from a previous invite
    transaction. What we are to do is to treat the reINVITE as
    if it were both an ACK and a reINVITE and process it normally.
    
    Later, when we receive the ACK we had been expecting, we will
    ignore it since its CSeq is less than the current iseqno of
    the sip_pvt representing this dialog.
    
    (closes issue #13849)
    Reported by: klaus3000
    Patches:
          13849_v2.patch uploaded by mmichelson (license 60)
    Tested by: mmichelson, klaus3000
  ........
................

Modified:
    branches/1.6.1/   (props changed)
    branches/1.6.1/channels/chan_sip.c

Propchange: branches/1.6.1/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Binary property 'trunk-merged' - no diff available.

Modified: branches/1.6.1/channels/chan_sip.c
URL: http://svn.digium.com/svn-view/asterisk/branches/1.6.1/channels/chan_sip.c?view=diff&rev=187495&r1=187494&r2=187495
==============================================================================
--- branches/1.6.1/channels/chan_sip.c (original)
+++ branches/1.6.1/channels/chan_sip.c Thu Apr  9 14:14:38 2009
@@ -17911,12 +17911,25 @@
 	}
 
 	if (!req->ignore && p->pendinginvite) {
-		/* We already have a pending invite. Sorry. You are on hold. */
-		p->glareinvite = seqno;     /* must hold on to this seqno to process ack and retransmit correctly */
-		transmit_response_reliable(p, "491 Request Pending", req);
-		ast_debug(1, "Got INVITE on call where we already have pending INVITE, deferring that - %s\n", p->callid);
-		/* Don't destroy dialog here */
-		return 0;
+		if (!ast_test_flag(&p->flags[0], SIP_OUTGOING) && ast_test_flag(&p->flags[1], SIP_PAGE2_DIALOG_ESTABLISHED)) {
+			/* We have received a reINVITE on an incoming call to which we have sent a 200 OK but not yet received
+			 * an ACK. According to RFC 5407, Section 3.1.4, the proper way to handle this race condition is to accept
+			 * the reINVITE since we have established a dialog.
+			 */
+			 
+			/* Note that this will both clear the pendinginvite flag and cancel the 
+			 * retransmission of the 200 OK. Basically, we're accepting this reINVITE as both an ACK
+			 * and a reINVITE in one request.
+			 */
+			__sip_ack(p, p->lastinvite, 1, 0);
+		} else {
+			/* We already have a pending invite. Sorry. You are on hold. */
+			p->glareinvite = seqno;
+			transmit_response_reliable(p, "491 Request Pending", req);
+			ast_debug(1, "Got INVITE on call where we already have pending INVITE, deferring that - %s\n", p->callid);
+			/* Don't destroy dialog here */
+			return 0;
+		}
 	}
 
 	p_replaces = get_header(req, "Replaces");