Hi all, With PJSIP version 1.10, the --no-force-lr option in PJSUA makes the "Route" header to be added to the end of the message just before the "Content-length" header. With loose routing enabled (default mode), the Route header is added just after the Via header. Page 25 of RFC 3261 says that the relative order of the header fields is not significant normally, although required to be on top in places where proxy is used. This will only help the proxy in parsing the SIP messages faster. Is there any problem with this behavior like some implementations of proxy *require* them to be on top? Thanks in advance, Sundar

Order of header field are not significant . If the SIP Proxy has been implemented according to rfc 3261. More over strict routing is mostly not used because of its complication on changing the request URI for every hop. Check whether PJ-SIP is following Strict routing according to 3261. On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Sundar Subramaniyan < sundar.subramaniyan@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > With PJSIP version 1.10, the --no-force-lr option in PJSUA makes the > "Route" header to be added to the end of the message just before the > "Content-length" header. > With loose routing enabled (default mode), the Route header is added just > after the Via header. > > Page 25 of RFC 3261 says that the relative order of the header fields is > not significant normally, although required to be on top in places where > proxy is used. > This will only help the proxy in parsing the SIP messages faster. > > Is there any problem with this behavior like some implementations of proxy > *require* them to be on top? > > Thanks in advance, > Sundar > > > _______________________________________________ > Visit our blog: http://blog.pjsip.org > > pjsip mailing list > pjsip@lists.pjsip.org > http://lists.pjsip.org/mailman/listinfo/pjsip_lists.pjsip.org > >