<div dir="auto"><div>Hi Emmanuel, </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I now understand what you're dealing with. No, we always go out over a different interface so a double header is always present. Although I'd say that enable_double_rr should always add two route headers. Even if both route headers are equal. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">As a workaround you could add the route headers manually using some kamailio scripting. We did this for a while until we were able to fix loose route to cover our usecase (it ignored default port). </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Regards, </div><div dir="auto">Timmo</div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_extra" dir="auto"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 2 Feb 2018 16:50, "Emmanuel BUU" <<a href="mailto:emmanuel.buu@ives.fr" target="_blank">emmanuel.buu@ives.fr</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="m_-9058323366501565518quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
  
    
  
  <div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <p>Hi Timmo,</p>
    <p>We do have <b>enable_double_rr</b> set to 1 but the route set
      added by the proxy when record_route() on the INVITE consists in a
      single route. This is because Alice and Bob are BOTH registered
      with the alternate port 5066 on the same interfacec and using the
      same protocol (UDP). To us, this seems logical.<br>
    </p>
    Do you have a double route in your case even though both party are
    on the same port, same interface and both UDP? If so, could you send
    us an exemple of Route: header?<font color="#888888"><br>
    <br>
    Emmanuel BUU<br>
    IVèS</font><div class="m_-9058323366501565518elided-text"><br>
    <br>
    <div class="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337moz-cite-prefix">Le 2018-02-02 à 14:18, Timmo Verlaan a
      écrit :<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div dir="auto">Hi Thomas,
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div>We have a similar situation but we use double route
            headers so the correct egress socket is chosen. You can
            enable this by setting a modparam: enable_double_rr.</div>
          <div>Would this be a solution for you?</div>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>Kind regards,</div>
          <div>Timmo Verlaan</div>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">On 2 Feb 2018 13:57, "Thomas
            Carvello" <<a href="mailto:thomas.carvello@ives.fr" target="_blank">thomas.carvello@ives.fr</a>>
            wrote:<br type="attribution">
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
                <p>Thank you for you answer.</p>
                <p>We have tried to change the local port for Bob, but
                  it doesnt change anything. And the contact value in
                  200 OK message has no influence in this case.</p>
                <p>In fact, we have made a further investigation
                  regarding the socket selection <b>and read the code.
                  </b>The issue seems to be located in the RR module and
                  the loose_route() function.<br>
                </p>
                In the  after_loose() function in loose.c, the  function
                set_force_socket()  is called only if a DOUBLE route is
                mentioned in the route set of the ACK message <br>
                <br>
                But when both users are using 5066 as proxy port, we get
                only ONE route for the proxy in the route set (and to us
                it is OK). In this case, we get a trace:<br>
                <br>
                "No next URI found"<br>
                <br>
                and the code exits. Later in the message processing,
                when t_relay() is called, the forward_request() selects
                the first socket defined in our configuration instead. <br>
                <br>
                At this point, we can't presume what socket we be
                select. We believe that it is a software bug  and that
                after_loose() should force the send_socket even though
                we have only one route in the route set. We also checked
                the 5.1 code and there is no change in this module that
                would alter this behavior.<br>
                <p> </p>
                <p>Are we missing something? <br>
                </p>
                <p>Thank you for you time,</p>
                Thomas<br>
                <br>
                <div class="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337gmail-m_-8764234924071474810m_-7815440543160779358moz-cite-prefix">Le
                  26/01/2018 à 15:43, Евгений Голей a écrit :<br>
                </div>
                <blockquote type="cite"> <span id="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337gmail-m_-8764234924071474810m_-7815440543160779358result_box" lang="en"><span>Hi<br>
                      <br>
                      Could it be because of Bob happend to use 5060 as
                      local port?</span><br>
                    <span>Yes, the port and the address in the ACK are
                      indicated by what the value in Contact was in
                      reply 200 Ok.</span> <span>Look at the message
                      200 Ok</span></span><br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <blockquote style="border-left:1px solid rgb(8,87,166);margin:10px;padding:0px 0px 0px 10px">
                    Четверг, 25 января 2018, 13:00 +03:00 от Thomas
                    Carvello <a class="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337gmail-m_-8764234924071474810m_-7815440543160779358moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:thomas.carvello@ives.fr" target="_blank"><thomas.carvello@ives.fr></a>:<br>
                    <br>
                    <div id="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337gmail-m_-8764234924071474810m_-7815440543160779358">
                      <div class="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337gmail-m_-8764234924071474810m_-7815440543160779358js-helper
gmail-m_-8764234924071474810m_-7815440543160779358js-readmsg-msg">
                        <div>
                          <div id="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337gmail-m_-8764234924071474810m_-7815440543160779358style_15168744520000000704_BODY">
                            <div class="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337gmail-m_-8764234924071474810m_-7815440543160779358class_1517002402">
                              <br>
                              <div class="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337gmail-m_-8764234924071474810m_-7815440543160779358moz-forward-container_mailru_css_attribute_postfix">
                                Hello,
                                <p>i have an issue with my Kamailio
                                  4.1.9 configuration.</p>
                                <p>This configuration is multi-homed, we
                                  have<b> two network</b> interfaces,
                                  one on a private network and on the
                                  public Internet. Kamailio is
                                  configured to listen on port 5060 and
                                  5066 on both interfaces. We register
                                  two users Alice and Bob on the  public
                                  Internet using port 5066.  Both users
                                  are behind a NAT and we capture the
                                  SIP exchange on the proxy server.</p>
                                <p>We have set the parameter mhomed=1<br>
                                </p>
                                <p>When Alice calls Bob, we have <br>
                                </p>
                                <pre>Alice                        Proxy                           Bob</pre>
                                <pre>src=5063             dst=5066
INVITE ------------------>

                        src=5066
                        ------  INVITE ---------------> dst=5060

                        dst=5066  
                        <------- 200 OK -------------- src=5060


dst=5063 
<------- 200 OK --------- src=5066

src=5063                dst=5066
-------- ACK ----------->

                        <b>src=5060      (blocked by NAT)</b>
                        ------  ACK-----x            dst=5060


</pre>
                                <p>The ACK packet gets relayed with the
                                  wrong source port. Then the NAT
                                  rejects the packet and the call cannot
                                  be established.</p>
                                <p>For some reason, when Bob calls
                                  Alice, the call is correctly
                                  established. Could it be because Bob
                                  happend to use 5060 as local port?<br>
                                </p>
                                <p>Also, if we set nhomed=0 it works BUT
                                  we are not sure that multi homed is
                                  handled correctly.</p>
                                I was wondering if you have encounter
                                this issue before?<br>
                                <p> I have investigated the code for
                                  selection socket and what is the logic
                                  of this selection ?</p>
                                <p><i><b>How does kamailo knows that it
                                      should choose 5066 as src port if
                                      the user is registered using port
                                      5066 instead of 5066?</b><br>
                                  </i></p>
                                <p>Thank you for your time.</p>
                                <p>Thomas<br>
                                </p>
                                <p><br>
                                </p>
                                <p><br>
                                </p>
                              </div>
                            </div>
                          </div>
                          <div>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
                            Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List<br>
                            <a href="mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org" target="_blank">sr-users@lists.kamailio.org</a><br>
                            <a href="https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users" target="_blank">https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi<wbr>-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users</a><br>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  Best <br>
                  Evgeniy<br>
                </blockquote>
                <br>
              </div>
              <br>
              ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
              Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List<br>
              <a href="mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org" target="_blank">sr-users@lists.kamailio.org</a><br>
              <a href="https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi<wbr>-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users</a><br>
              <br>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre>______________________________<wbr>_________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
<a class="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org" target="_blank">sr-users@lists.kamailio.org</a>
<a class="m_-9058323366501565518m_938679815086291337moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users" target="_blank">https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi<wbr>-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </div></div>

<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List<br>
<a href="mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org" target="_blank">sr-users@lists.kamailio.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi<wbr>-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>