I've been doing some testing against FreeSwitch 1.2.0 and noticed what looks like a bug.
SIP/2.0 202 Accepted
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.8.168:5070;branch=z9hG4bKC0A808A82E8652DB03
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.8.168:5070;branch=z9hG4bKC0A808A82E8652DB11
CSeq: 1 SUBSCRIBE
Expires: 3600
User-Agent: FreeSWITCH-mod_sofia/1.2.0-rc2+git~20120616T193227Z~068586f28f+unclean~20120618T093505Z
Allow: INVITE, ACK, BYE, CANCEL, OPTIONS, MESSAGE, UPDATE, INFO, REGISTER, REFER, NOTIFY, PUBLISH, SUBSCRIBE
Supported: timer, precondition, path, replaces
Allow-Events: talk, hold, presence, dialog, line-seize, call-info, sla, include-session-description, presence.winfo, message-summary, refer
Subscription-State: active;expires=3600
Content-Length: 0
So I would expect subsequent NOTIFY messages to be send to the address & port in the contact: sip:
proxyhost.test.net:5060 (contact header from SUBSCRIBE)
However I do not see the NOTIFY requests arrive at sip:
proxyhost.test.net on port 5060, a wireshark trace on FreeSwitch says is sending them to a different port, port 33406 which is the port Freeswitch received the request on.
This is how the packet looks in WireShark:
Ethernet II, Src: 42:61:a8:ef:c3:de (42:61:a8:ef:c3:de), Dst: 96:cd:bb:a4:a4:2e (96:cd:bb:a4:a4:2e)
Internet Protocol Version 4, Src: 192.168.8.238 (192.168.8.238), Dst: 192.168.8.168 (192.168.8.168)
User Datagram Protocol, Src Port: sip (5060), Dst Port: 34406 (34406) **Would expect this to be 5060**
I thought this defect might be in the ball park:
Anyone seen this?
To resolve I used TCP instead of UDP but wanted to flag it up to see if anyone else had seen it
Regards
Steve P