<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/04/16 21:57, Marrold wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAC-Lcd-AVaVDjSt8V5amEDcYtLXGC+YGbtM65-J45opL+3K8Cg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">I've been doing some experimentation with <span
style="font-size:12.8px">t_any_timeout()
and t_branch_timeout(), and I've observed they return true if
either the initial invite receives no response, or if the 200
OK is not acknowledged by the UAC.</span>
<div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Is there any way of
differentiating between these scenarios? <br>
</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
If Kamailio matches the 200ok for transaction, then it should not
give true for a timeout check. But maybe there is a mismatch also in
kamailio if the 200ok is sent to caller but it is no ACK sent back.
In such case, a sip network trace will be useful to investigate what
happens there.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Daniel<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.asipto.com">http://www.asipto.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://twitter.com/#!/miconda">http://twitter.com/#!/miconda</a> - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda">http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda</a>
Kamailio World Conference, Berlin, May 18-20, 2016 - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.kamailioworld.com">http://www.kamailioworld.com</a></pre>
</body>
</html>