[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] Properly handle 200 and unknown responses conatined in NOTIFY requests received in response to REFER requests
David Vossel
dvossel at digium.com
Fri Aug 13 13:09:31 CDT 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/860/#review2596
-----------------------------------------------------------
/branches/1.8/channels/chan_sip.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/860/#comment5690>
should this be <= 200?
- David
On 2010-08-12 14:22:47, Matthew Nicholson wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/860/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated 2010-08-12 14:22:47)
>
>
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
>
>
> Summary
> -------
>
> Since r217482 it appears that asterisk has not properly been handling responses to REFER requests. The problem was that after receiving a '200 Ok' sipfrag in a NOTIFY request received in response to a REFER request, asterisk would not queue up a AST_TRANSFER_SUCCESS control frame to signal the completion of the transfer. That combined with ast_transfer()'s willingness to wait indefinitely for said control frame, causes the channel to "freeze" in the Transfer app.
>
> Additionally, a NOTIFY containing a sipfrag with an unknown response would result in AST_TRANSFER_SUCCESS being queued.
>
>
> This addresses bug 17486.
> https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=17486
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> /branches/1.8/channels/chan_sip.c 281983
>
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/860/diff
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> Tested with a testsuite test that causes asterisk to originate a call and send a REFER to a sipp script that sends various responses back to asterisk.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matthew
>
>
More information about the asterisk-dev
mailing list