Yes, forwarding is qustionable, isn't that child should ARQ the parent?
if child is registrated as normal endpoint shouldn't it send normal ARQ?
Piotrek
Maybe forwarding an LRQ to a parent gatekeeper
can be questionable, but the parent gatekeeper should
not reject LRQs from any registered endpoint. The standard
specifies than a registered endpoint is allowed to LRQ
its gatekeeper. LRJ seems to be a bug.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Piotr Szafran"
<Piotr.Szafran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 4:46 PM
When i set
[RoutingPolicy::OnLRQ]
default=internal
the LRQ from GK-3 is rejected because there is no specific
registrated endpoint - that is fully known behaviour
but when i set
[RoutingPolicy::OnLRQ]
default=parent
the LRQ is being forwarded to the parent (GK-1), even though there is
no neighbor configuration for a "neighbor-parent".
So let me ask again, is it normal that gnu forwards LRQ to the parent
(that it is registrated to as an [Endpoint]) without any reason??
Regards
Piotrek
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________________
Posting: mailto:Openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549
Unsubscribe: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openh323gk-users
Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/
