November 2015 - sr-dev - kamailio.org

[kamailio] error while dumping dialog via RPC (#145)
by Savolainen Dmitri 01 May '18

01 May '18

In part of profiles and/or variables section while using `static inline void internal_rpc_print_dlg(rpc_t *rpc, void *c, dlg_cell_t *dlg, int with_context) ` May be it is an error of ctl module ``` # kamcmd dlg.list { h_entry: 6718 h_id: 20440 call-id: 48c9fe85f6750163(a)192.168.5.60 from_uri: sip:000*051@xxxxxx.xx:5068 to_uri: sip:002@xxxxxx.xx:5068 state: 4 start_ts: 1430324850 init_ts: 1430324847 timeout: 1430368049 lifetime: 43200 dflags: 515 sflags: 0 iflags: 0 caller: { tag: bda5e24faa4c4ff5 contact: sip:000*051@192.168.5.60:5066;transport=udp;alias=xxx.xxx.78.202~5066~1 cseq: 5457 route_set: socket: udp:xxx.xxx.66.150:5068 } callee: { tag: 4y2gjr7N9231K contact: sip:002@xxx.xxx.66.151:5080;transport=udp cseq: 0 route_set: socket: udp:xxx.xxx.66.150:5068 } profiles: { ERROR while parsing the record 62, @698: 03 : bad record ``` --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/145

4 6

[kamailio] dmq_usrloc replication and max_contacts (Kamailio v4.3.1) (#265)
by 00Asgaroth00 16 Feb '18

16 Feb '18

This is a snip from the user's mailing list, I'm just adding it to the issue tracker, as it is yet to be confirmed as a bug, only here for tracking pruporses: ``` I have a situation where I have 2 devices registering with the same AOR, I have the registrar module's max_contacts parameter set to 1 and I use the 0x04 flag on the save function. When I use dmq_usrloc for replication, I can see 2 contacts registered for the AOR on the "client" nodes whereas the node where the actual registration took place only has 1 contact for the AOR. ``` ``` It seems to me like another bug, although again I'm not familiar with the module so can't be sure without looking that it is not intended behaviour. I plan to look later this week when I have some time but in the meantime, you can send me the examples directly if you like. ``` --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/265

6 17

git:master:b450a769: Updated P-CSCF example with additional Rx_AAR params
by Richard Good 08 Feb '18

08 Feb '18

Module: kamailio Branch: master Commit: b450a769cff3b5c8ea0962299f6b087da089cd59 URL: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/b450a769cff3b5c8ea0962299f6b087… Author: Richard Good <richard.good(a)smilecoms.com> Committer: Richard Good <richard.good(a)smilecoms.com> Date: 2014-12-17T10:58:00+02:00 Updated P-CSCF example with additional Rx_AAR params --- Modified: examples/pcscf/kamailio.cfg --- Diff: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/b450a769cff3b5c8ea0962299f6b087… Patch: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/b450a769cff3b5c8ea0962299f6b087… --- diff --git a/examples/pcscf/kamailio.cfg b/examples/pcscf/kamailio.cfg index c09cdc9..c2d5f55 100644 --- a/examples/pcscf/kamailio.cfg +++ b/examples/pcscf/kamailio.cfg @@ -983,7 +983,7 @@ route[Orig_Initial] #!ifdef WITH_RX xlog("L_DBG","Diameter: Orig authorizing media via Rx\n"); - if(Rx_AAR("ORIG_SESSION_AAR","orig")==0){ + if(Rx_AAR("ORIG_SESSION_AAR","orig","",-1)==0){ exit; } } @@ -1035,7 +1035,7 @@ onreply_route[Orig_Initial_reply] #!ifdef WITH_RX if (t_check_status("180|183|200")){ xlog("L_DBG","Diameter: Orig authorizing media via Rx\n"); - if(Rx_AAR("ORIG_SESSION_AAR_REPLY","orig")==0){ + if(Rx_AAR("ORIG_SESSION_AAR_REPLY","orig","",-1)==0){ exit; } } @@ -1089,7 +1089,7 @@ route[Term_Initial] #!ifdef WITH_RX xlog("L_DBG","Diameter: Term authorizing media via Rx\n"); - if(Rx_AAR("TERM_SESSION_AAR","term")==0){ + if(Rx_AAR("TERM_SESSION_AAR","term","",-1)==0){ exit; } } @@ -1138,7 +1138,7 @@ onreply_route[Term_Initial_reply] #!ifdef WITH_RX if (t_check_status("180|183|200")){ xlog("L_DBG","Diameter: Orig authorizing media via Rx\n"); - if(Rx_AAR("TERM_SESSION_AAR_REPLY","term")==0){ + if(Rx_AAR("TERM_SESSION_AAR_REPLY","term","",-1)==0){ exit; } }

2 1

[kamailio] PID file permissions (#231)
by Arsen 26 Jul '17

26 Jul '17

ENV: Debian 8 So on most Linux systems the /var/run folder is a tmpfs and after which clears after each reboot As I try to start up kamailio after a reboot through kamctl I get the following error. "ERROR: PID file /var/run/kamailio.pid does not exist -- Kamailio start failed" Because kamailio does not have the permission to write to the /var/run folder as the kamailio user. Would it be possible to add in the "kamctl" code a section where the SPECIFIED PID LOCATION (/var/run/kamailio) is checked and if it does not exist create it as the root user and chown it to the SPECIFIED USER (kamailio)? The way I have patched it for now is to create a init script that creates a /var/run/kamailio folder and chmods it to kamailio:kamailio Thanks everyone! --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/231

6 13

[kamailio] consistency on name of main c file for a module (#82)
by Victor Seva 13 Feb '17

13 Feb '17

main file should be modulename.c or modulename_mod.c --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/82

2 7

[kamailio] permissions: RPC AddressDump doesn't include mask size (#250)
by Olle E. Johansson 10 Jan '17

10 Jan '17

The new RPC command doesn't output the mask, only the IP. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/250

2 5

Outbound flow failure handling merged to master
by Hugh Waite 23 Nov '16

23 Nov '16

Hello, As you will see I have merged my branch back into master. These changes add a new event route [tm:branch-failure] to the tm module which is run when any failure response is received on a transaction. The event_route uses a new route type BRANCH_ROUTE which limits the functions that can be run in the route. The functions t_check_status(), t_next_contact_flow(), t_relay() and unregister() can be used in this route. A new pv $T_reply_ruid is accessible in this route which can be used to unregister a single contact entry. The following example route can be used on a registrar to handle failed or invalid flows: event_route[tm:branch-failure] { xlog("L_INFO", "event_route[tm:branch-failure]\n"); if (t_check_status("430|403")) { if (!unregister("location", "$tu", "$T_reply_ruid")) { xlog("L_WARN", "failed to unregister $tu with ruid $T_reply_ruid\n"); } if (!t_next_contact_flow()) { xlog("L_INFO", "No more flows\n"); } else { xlog("L_INFO", "Next flow\n"); t_relay(); } } } Any bugs, memory leaks etc. let me know! Hugh -- Hugh Waite Principal Design Engineer Crocodile RCS Ltd.

4 11

[kamailio] pua: E_Tag miss match due to race between consecutive PUBLISH requests (#21)
by Ovidiu Sas 10 Oct '16

10 Oct '16

If a PUBLISH request is sent before a 200 OK for the previous PUBLISH request is received, the E-Tag is reset which leads to inconsistent presentity data in the presence server. This is happening because the second PUBLISH is sent with the same E-Tag as the previous one, but the presence server has an updated the E-Tag (generated while handling the first PUBLISH). The pua module should implement a queuing mechanism for subsequent PUBLISH request while a previous PUBLISH transaction is in progress. No new PUBLISH requests should be sent before a response to the previous PUBLISH request was received and the E-Tag updated. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/21

3 4

[kamailio] uac module (uac_req_send, register) doesn't do failover (#210)
by Alex 30 Aug '16

30 Aug '16

Requests send with uac module's functions like uac_req_send() and remote registrations use the TM module, but don't actually do (DNS) failover when a destination is unreachable or sends a 503. In the tm's uac.c, t_uac_prepare() function, i can already see that the dns handle is stored in a throwaway variable instead of in the transaction, but fixing the issue isn't as simple as just storing it in the transaction (print_uac_request_from_buf() needs a uas in the transaction). Due to github not supporting attachments to issues, the sample config and debug log are inline.... :( DNS entry: ``` $ host -t SRV _sip._udp.failover.test.speakup.nl _sip._udp.failover.test.speakup.nl has SRV record 10 0 1111 try1.test.speakup.nl. _sip._udp.failover.test.speakup.nl has SRV record 100 0 2222 try2.test.speakup.nl. ``` Log snippet: ```syslog Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: INFO: <script>: Sending OPTIONS request to sip:failover.test.speakup.nl Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: tm [uac.c:249]: t_uac_prepare(): DEBUG:tm:t_uac: next_hop=<sip:failover.test.speakup.nl> Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:537]: _dns_hash_find(): (_sip._udp.failover.test.speakup.nl(34), 33), h=825 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [resolve.c:937]: get_record(): skipping 8 NS (p=0x9ea284, end=0x9ea3e9) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [resolve.c:952]: get_record(): parsing 9 ARs (p=0x9ea335, end=0x9ea3e9) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:1741]: dns_get_related(): (0x7f225233eb38 (_sip._udp.failover.test.speakup.nl, 33), 33, *0x7f2257baf2b8) (0) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:840]: dns_cache_add_unsafe(): adding _sip._udp.failover.test.speakup.nl(34) 33 (flags=0) at 825 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:840]: dns_cache_add_unsafe(): adding try1.test.speakup.nl(20) 1 (flags=0) at 310 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:840]: dns_cache_add_unsafe(): adding try2.test.speakup.nl(20) 1 (flags=0) at 307 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:2336]: dns_srv_get_nxt_rr(): (0x7f225233eb38, 0, 0, 1597643831): selected 0/1 in grp. 0 (rand_w=0, rr=0x7f225233eba0 rd=0x7f225233ebb8 p=10 w=0 rsum=0) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:537]: _dns_hash_find(): (try1.test.speakup.nl(20), 1), h=310 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:2926]: dns_a_resolve(): (try1.test.speakup.nl, 0) returning 0 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:3169]: dns_srv_resolve_ip(): ("_sip._udp.failover.test.speakup.nl", 0, 0), ret=0, ip=192.168.1.245 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [dns_cache.c:3260]: dns_srv_sip_resolve(): (failover.test.speakup.nl, 0, 0), srv0, ret=0 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: tm [uac.c:150]: dlg2hash(): DEBUG: dlg2hash: 54501 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: tm [uac.c:351]: t_uac_prepare(): executing event_route[tm:local-request] Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:606]: parse_msg(): SIP Request: Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:608]: parse_msg(): method: <OPTIONS> Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:610]: parse_msg(): uri: <sip:failover.test.speakup.nl> Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:612]: parse_msg(): version: <SIP/2.0> Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_via.c:1254]: parse_via_param(): Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK5e4d.47adbbf5000000000000000000000000.0>; state=16 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_via.c:2642]: parse_via(): end of header reached, state=5 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:496]: parse_headers(): parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:498]: parse_headers(): parse_headers: this is the first via Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/parse_addr_spec.c:894]: parse_addr_spec(): end of header reached, state=10 Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:173]: get_hdr_field(): DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [22]; uri=[sip:to.example.com] Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: [97B blob data] Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [parser/msg_parser.c:153]: get_hdr_field(): get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <10> <OPTIONS> Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: pv [pv_core.c:376]: pv_get_xto_attr(): no Tag parameter Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: INFO: <script>: [udp:172.28.4.128:6789] [10 OPTIONS] Request (cid: 6cd531e47cc63e20-18178(a)172.28.4.128 Branch: -1 ToTag: <null> len:382) To <sip:failover.test.speakup.nl> via <sip:failover.test.speakup.nl> Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:631]: destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:631]: destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:631]: destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:631]: destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:631]: destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [usr_avp.c:631]: destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) Jun 15 10:00:03 rio UACFailover[18178]: DEBUG: <core> [xavp.c:446]: xavp_destroy_list(): destroying xavp list (nil) Jun 15 10:00:05 rio UACFailover[18176]: DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:1230]: t_should_relay_response(): ->>>>>>>>> T_code=0, new_code=408 Jun 15 10:00:05 rio UACFailover[18176]: WARNING: tm [t_reply.c:957]: run_failure_handlers(): Warning: run_failure_handlers: no UAC support (1, 0) Jun 15 10:00:05 rio UACFailover[18176]: DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:2016]: local_reply(): DEBUG: local_reply: branch=0, save=0, winner=0 Jun 15 10:00:05 rio UACFailover[18176]: DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:2053]: local_reply(): DEBUG: local transaction completed ``` Sample config: ```python #------------------ # Flags #------------------ debug=3 memdbg=5 mem_summary=5 #fork=no # This option should not be present to enable forking but disable daemonize, also -D commandline parameter is needed log_stderror=no sip_warning=no listen=172.28.4.128 port=6789 children=2 shm_mem_size=64 log_name="UACFailover" check_via=no # (cmd. line: -v) dns=no # (cmd. line: -r) rev_dns=no # (cmd. line: -R) dns_use_search_list=no use_dns_failover=yes dns_srv_lb=yes disable_tcp=yes mpath="/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/kamailio/modules/" loadmodule "pv.so" loadmodule "tm.so" loadmodule "tmx.so" loadmodule "sl.so" loadmodule "xlog.so" loadmodule "rr.so" loadmodule "uac.so" loadmodule "rtimer.so" # ----------------------------------------------------------------- # Module settings # ----------------------------------------------------------------- modparam("pv", "varset", "server=s:LOGNAME") modparam("tm", "auto_inv_100", 0) # Time until provisional response (eg "100 Trying") is received modparam("tm", "fr_timer", 2000) # Time to await final response on INVITE per branch (eg per branch ring time) modparam("tm", "fr_inv_timer", 10000) # Time to await final response on INVITE (eg ring time) modparam("tm", "max_inv_lifetime", 20000) modparam("tm", "restart_fr_on_each_reply", 0) modparam("tm", "failure_reply_mode", 3) modparam("rtimer", "timer", "name=uac;interval=10;mode=1;") modparam("rtimer", "exec", "timer=uac;route=TIMER") route { xlog("L_NOTICE", "[$pr:$si:$sp] [$cs $rm] Request. (cid: $ci <$fu> => <$ru> len: $ml)"); drop(); } event_route[tm:local-request] { xlog("L_INFO", " [$pr:$si:$sp] [$cs $rm] Request (cid: $ci Branch: $T_branch_idx ToTag: $tt len:$ml) To <$ru> via <$du>"); } onreply_route { xlog("L_INFO", " [$pr:$si:$sp] [$cs $rm] Reply (cid: $ci Branch: $T_branch_idx Status: $rs $rr ToTag: $tt len:$ml)"); } route[TIMER] { if not $var(done) == 1 { $var(done) = 1; $uac_req(method) = "OPTIONS"; $uac_req(ruri) = "sip:failover.test.speakup.nl"; $uac_req(furi) = "sip:from.example.com"; $uac_req(turi) = "sip:to.example.com"; xlog("L_INFO", "Sending $uac_req(method) request to $uac_req(ruri)"); uac_req_send(); } } ``` --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/210

2 3

git:master:b7c588df: tm: store last received response code before running onreply_route
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 02 Aug '16

02 Aug '16

Module: kamailio Branch: master Commit: b7c588dff06030a82f305b210573be5bbc961cec URL: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/b7c588dff06030a82f305b210573be5… Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com> Committer: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com> Date: 2015-09-07T15:56:45+02:00 tm: store last received response code before running onreply_route - otherwise an innapropriate cancel can happen if the current branch got before an 1xx response, and the script writer enforces another reply code with t_reply() - reported by Thomas Sevestre, GH#315 --- Modified: modules/tm/t_reply.c --- Diff: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/b7c588dff06030a82f305b210573be5… Patch: https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/b7c588dff06030a82f305b210573be5… --- diff --git a/modules/tm/t_reply.c b/modules/tm/t_reply.c index b2e6e53..8da3205 100644 --- a/modules/tm/t_reply.c +++ b/modules/tm/t_reply.c @@ -2286,10 +2286,21 @@ int reply_received( struct sip_msg *p_msg ) backup_xavps = xavp_set_list(&t->xavps_list); #endif setbflagsval(0, uac->branch_flags); + if(msg_status>last_uac_status) { + /* current response (msg) status is higher that the last received + * on the same branch - set it temporarily so functions in onreply_route + * can access it (e.g., avoid sending CANCEL by forcing another t_relply() + * in onreply_route when a negative sip response was received) */ + uac->last_received = msg_status; + } + /* Pre- and post-script callbacks have already * been executed by the core. (Miklos) */ run_top_route(onreply_rt.rlist[onreply_route], p_msg, &ctx); + + /* restore brach last_received as before executing onreply_route */ + uac->last_received = last_uac_status; /* transfer current message context back to t */ if (t->uas.request) t->uas.request->flags=p_msg->flags; getbflagsval(0, &uac->branch_flags);

2 1