sr-users November 2004

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

203 participants
386 discussions

Re: [Serusers] Problem with specific phones only able to registerto ipnumber andnotdomain..

by Alex Mack

Hi! Tanks for the answer. subst() did work but obviously didn't solve the problem. Below is the debug trace for the subst and a snippet from the used ser.cfg. As you can see, subst works good, but ser still stores xx(a)100.100.100.100 as aor. Maybe my regex isn't good enough? Maybe the approach is wrong at all if ser extracts the vital header information already before entering the routing script at all. (IPs in the dumps are replaced, ser is 100.100.100.100, phone is 100.100.100.131, domain is mydomain.org) 0(8293) method: <REGISTER> 0(8293) uri: <sip:100.100.100.100:5060> 0(8293) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=1 0(8293) end of header reached, state=5 0(8293) parse_headers: Via found, flags=1 0(8293) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(8293) After parse_msg... 0(8293) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=128 0(8293) end of header reached, state=9 0(8293) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [48]; uri=[sip:31@100.100.100.100:5060] 0(8293) DEBUG: to body ["optiPoint 1 (31)" <sip:31@100.100.100.100:5060> ] 0(8293) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <2012717775> <REGISTER> 0(8293) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=0 0(8293) found end of header 0(8293) DEBUG: is_maxfwd_present: max_forwards header not found! 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=256 0(8293) find_first_route(): No Route headers found 0(8293) loose_route(): There is no Route HF 0(8293) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==13 && [100.100.100.100] == [100.100.100.100] 0(8293) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(8293) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==13 && [100.100.100.100] == [100.100.100.100] 0(8293) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(8293) #### Authenticate ### 0(8293) check_nonce(): comparing [4187b4fa25e5e432b9e0bd204a429446c2a3ae9b] and [4187b4fa0e8bde761be567ab9dd0f201ab31ab49] 0(8293) pre_auth(): Invalid nonce value received 0(8293) build_auth_hf(): 'WWW-Authenticate: Digest realm="mydomain.org", nonce="4187b536507484b10dcc87b97b7ee4866bf23601" ' 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=-1 0(8293) check_via_address(100.100.100.131, 100.100.100.131, 0) 0(8293) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list (nil) 0(8293) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(8293) SIP Request: 0(8293) method: <REGISTER> 0(8293) uri: <sip:100.100.100.100:5060> 0(8293) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=1 0(8293) end of header reached, state=5 0(8293) parse_headers: Via found, flags=1 0(8293) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(8293) After parse_msg... 0(8293) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=128 0(8293) end of header reached, state=9 0(8293) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [48]; uri=[sip:31@100.100.100.100:5060] 0(8293) DEBUG: to body ["optiPoint 1 (31)" <sip:31@100.100.100.100:5060> ] 0(8293) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <2012717776> <REGISTER> 0(8293) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=0 0(8293) found end of header 0(8293) DEBUG: is_maxfwd_present: max_forwards header not found! 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=256 0(8293) find_first_route(): No Route headers found 0(8293) loose_route(): There is no Route HF 0(8293) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==13 && [100.100.100.100] == [100.100.100.100] 0(8293) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(8293) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==13 && [100.100.100.100] == [100.100.100.100] 0(8293) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(8293) #### Authenticate ### 0(8293) check_nonce(): comparing [4187b536507484b10dcc87b97b7ee4866bf23601] and [4187b536507484b10dcc87b97b7ee4866bf23601] 0(8293) HA1 string calculated: 6a3f36c88615ea8517a2806d05102e83 0(8293) check_response(): Our result = 'c8fd067f0bb9cdb7a4688cde18a5d3cb' 0(8293) check_response(): Authorization is OK 0(8293) save_rpid(): rpid value is '' 0(8293) subst_run: running. r=0 0(8293) subst_run: matched (60, 20): [sip:31@100.100.100.100] 0(8293) subst_run: running. r=0 0(8293) subst_run: matched (114, 20): [sip:31@100.100.100.100] 0(8293) subst_run: running. r=1 0(8293) textops: subst_f: replacing at offset 101 [sip:31@100.100.100.100] with [sip:31@mydomain.org] 0(8293) textops: subst_f: replacing at offset 155 [sip:31@100.100.100.100] with [sip:31@mydomain.org] 0(8293) subst_f: lst was 0x80fd498 0(8293) #### IP replaced! ### 0(8293) #### saving location ### 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=-1 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=33554432 0(8293) build_contact(): Created Contact HF: Contact: <sip:31@100.100.100.131:5060>;expires=90 0(8293) parse_headers: flags=-1 0(8293) check_via_address(100.100.100.131, 100.100.100.131, 0) 0(8293) #### break ### 0(8293) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list (nil) 0(8293) receive_msg: cleaning up snippet of ser.cfg: if (uri==myself) { if (method=="REGISTER") { log (1, "#### Authenticate ###\n"); # Uncomment this if you want to use digest authentication if (!www_authorize("mydomain.org", "subscriber")) { www_challenge("mydomain.org", "0"); break; }; if ( subst('/sip:([^@]*)@100.100.100.100/sip:\1@mydomain.org/ig') ) { log (1, "#### IP replaced! ###\n"); }; log (1, "#### saving location ###\n"); save("location"); log (1, "#### break ###\n"); break; }; Hope someone can help me out of this one. Used version of ser is 0.8.99-dev12 (cvs checkout around 15:30 UTC on Nov 2 2004) Thanks. Alex Mack. Claus Futtrup wrote: > Hi > > You can use subst("") function in SER to handle rewriting of the To: > header > before you do save("") (requires little regular expression magic which I > can help with if you are not familiar with REs :-). > > Kind Regards > > Claus Futtrup > Project Manager > GoIP, The IP telephone company > > Mail: cf(a)goip.dk > > Tlf: +45 46968000 > Fax: +45 46968001 > GoIP: +45 32716064 > > "The box said 'Requires Windows 95, NT, or better,' so I installed > Linux." > > This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain > privileged > or confidential information. If you have received it in error, please > notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other use > of the > email by you is prohibited. > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Mack" <amack(a)fhm.edu> > To: <serusers(a)lists.iptel.org> > Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 11:55 AM > Subject: Re: [Serusers] Problem with specific phones only able to > registerto ipnumber andnotdomain.. > > >> I have similar problems (Siemens Optipoint 400) and I'm interested in >> a solution, too. I've posted to this mailing list a week ago. See >> below for the messages so far. >> >> Claus Futtrup wrote: >> >>> Hi Guys, >>> >>> I have this problem with a few phones, that they can only use IP >>> number for >>> proxy adress and domain. So when they register to the proxy, the >>> location >>> database will have user@ipnumber and not user@domain (use_domain, 0). >>> >>> The problem is then as follows: that when a caller that registeres >>> with the >>> domain name are unable to call users that register with the domains IP >>> number and vice versa. lookup("location") simply replies not found. >>> >>> Now I know why it happens, but is there a solution for this problem. >>> Like >>> only look at user and not user@domain or user@ipnumber? >>> >>> Kind Regards >>> >>> Claus Futtrup >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Serusers mailing list >>> serusers(a)lists.iptel.org >>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >> >> >> >>> Hi Alex, >>> >>> Have you enabled "use_domain" parameter for usrloc module? If you >>> set it to 0 (as default) usrloc will not use the domain part to >>> perform usrloc lookup. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Marian Dumitru >>> >>> Alex Mack wrote: >>> >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> I'm using ser with X-Ten Lite Soft-UA and Siemens optiPoint 400 IP >>>> phones. Problem is: the Siemens phones don't register themselves >>>> correctly. >>>> >>>> For example: >>>> (e.g., ser has IP 100.100.100.100) >>>> >>>> Soft-UA is "sip:30@mydomain.org" >>>> Phone 1 is "sip:31@mydomain.org" >>>> Phone 2 is "sip:32@mydomain.org" >>>> >>>> Soft-UA registers itself as "sip:30@mydomain.org" >>>> Phone 1 registers itself as "sip:31@100.100.100.100" (seems to be >>>> odd behaviour) >>>> Phone 2 registers itself as "sip:32@100.100.100.100" >>>> >>>> But now the lookup fails if you start dialing from the phones. If >>>> you dial "32" (e.g. from Phone 1), the phone generates an INVITE to >>>> "sip:32@mydomain.org" which can't be found in usrloc (DEBUG tells >>>> that) and the call fails. If you dial "30" from the same phone, the >>>> call comes through, because "sip:30@mydomain.org" was found in usrloc. >>>> I tried to mangle the uri in the REGISTER message before >>>> "save("location");", without effect. I've used "replace(re, str)", >>>> but it didn't seem to work. >>>> >>>> Any ideas to overcome that bug of the phones? >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> Alex. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Serusers mailing list >>>> serusers(a)lists.iptel.org >>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >>>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Serusers mailing list >> serusers(a)lists.iptel.org >> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >> >

19 years, 6 months

[Serusers] IPv6 client that work with SER?

by Sean Boran

Hi, I have SER running on an IPv6 (dual stack Suse) box, and would like to find a Windows Ipv6 SIP client that works with ser, for "IPv6 SIP demo" purposes. The client should have IM and presence and P2P audio at least? Any suggestions? I've tried Windows Messenger, to no avail. Kphone looks quite good but only runs on Linux.. Thanks in advance, Sean

19 years, 6 months

[Serusers] SIP Server for operation or carrier service.

by Saki Yaka

Hello, all I looking for SIP server for implement VoIP services ,who can provide and implement this services? For frist phase I need to start at 50,000 subs., 5,000 concurrents and upgrade in future. I will give you more information later. Thank you,all --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a

19 years, 6 months

[Serusers] checking From address in REGISTER messages

by Suvendu Sethi

Hi All, Is there any way to find out From address when a REGISTER request is received? I am running SER on Red Hat Linux 9. SER version is 0.8.14. It is running fine by default and I am able to transfer requests across 2 servers by modifing the ser.cfg. But not able to validate the phone number for REGISTER requests. Appreciate your help in this regard. Many thanks. Regards, Suvendu. ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partner online Go to: http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony

19 years, 6 months

[Serusers] please help

by Chad Maggard

I keep getting this error HA1 calculation failed when I try to do this ./ser_mysql.sh create Im trying to set up a mysql database for ser.. I have Fedora Core 2 with the lastest kernal.. and my ser version is 8.14

19 years, 6 months

[Serusers] API for developping client

by MAMADOU TOURE

Hi every body one of my freinds has just told me about ser sip serveur. I want to developpe clients of ser to alow peoples to download it and use it to call each other. I'm a delphi programmer so i'm looking for ser API for implementing my client using delphi. regard. Vous manquez despace pour stocker vos mails ? Yahoo! Mail vous offre GRATUITEMENT 100 Mo ! Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.benefits.yahoo.com/ Le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger est arrivé ! Découvrez toutes les nouveautés pour dialoguer instantanément avec vos amis. A télécharger gratuitement sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com

19 years, 6 months

[Serusers] Re: STUN Servers

by dbaron＠MIT.EDU

This isn't exactly an SER issue but it was suggested that I ask here - iptel.org has an SRV record for a STUN: _stun._udp.iptel.org. 86400 IN SRV 0 0 3478 sip.iptel.org. But that server doesn't seem to be responding to STUN requests. Does anybody know if it should be working? Or is working for them? Thanks. Dennis

19 years, 6 months

RE: [Serusers] RE: SER and child_init()

by Gandhi, Jignesh

Thanks for the quick reply. I looked at the sr_module.h and saw the defs that you are talking about. Now I am starting SER with fork=yes and children=2. so I get the following output from serctl ps cmd. [root@test gl]# serctl ps 0 10771 attendant 1 10773 receiver child=0 sock=0 @ 192.168.160.12:5060 2 10774 receiver child=1 sock=0 @ 192.168.160.12:5060 3 10775 fifo server 4 10776 timer 5 10777 tcp receiver 6 10778 tcp receiver 7 10779 tcp main process The only rank values that I can count on not to startup a socket connection in the child_init function are -1, -2, -4. The question I have is, how can I know in my child_init function that the process that the child_init() function is called from is "receiver child=n" ? for example I know that if I have set children=2 in ser.cfg than the first 2 times the child_init function will be called from the receiver child=0 and receiver child=1 thread. Also How come the tcp receiver is getting started for each child ? I hope that I am making sense here. thanks, Jignesh Gandhi -----Original Message From: Jan Janak To: Gandhi, Jignesh Cc: 'serusers(a)lists.iptel.org' Sent: 11/3/2004 11:08 AM Subject: Re: [Serusers] RE: SER in debug mode no fork mode means that there will be only one process listening for and processing SIP messages. In addition to that there will be also the timer process (taking care of timers) and fifo process (processing commands sent to ser over the FIFO interface). The child init function will be called for all of them. See: root@localhost:/home/janakj# serctl ps 0 6266 stand-alone receiver @ 127.0.0.1:5060 1 6267 timer 2 6268 fifo server If you want to execute the code in the listening process only, then you can ignore calls of child_init that have the parameter set to PROC_TIMER and PROC_FIFO (defined in sr_module.h). Note that it is usually a good idea to have the same environment in the timer process as in the receiver as some functionality might be called from the timer. Jan. On 03-11 10:14, Gandhi, Jignesh wrote: > Hello all, > > I am trying to debug a new module that I have written. > So I have set fork=no and debug=4 and commented out the > child line. > > The question I have is that the how may times the child_init() > function be called ? > > > The child_init() function in my module sets up a socket connection > to a server and I can see that the child_init() function is getting > called 3 times. I do not understand this. Am I missing something ? > > The mod_init function is getting called only once, like it is supposed to. > > I have attached the output from ser startup. The module that I have written > is called gl. > > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: INFO: glenayre redirector(gl module) initializing > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: INFO: udp_init: SO_RCVBUF is initially 65535 > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: INFO: udp_init: SO_RCVBUF is finally 262142 > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): init_child #-1 / pid > <10269> > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): Initializing TCP > connection > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): TCP port = 1234 > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): TCP host = localhost > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: INFO: fifo process starting: 10270 > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): init_child #-2 / pid > <10270> > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): Initializing TCP > connection > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): TCP port = 1234 > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): TCP host = localhost > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: SER: open_uac_fifo: fifo server up at > /tmp/ser_fifo... > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): init_child #1 / pid > <10268> > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): Initializing TCP > connection > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): TCP port = 1234 > Nov 2 14:07:20 sara ser: gl:INFO: gl_child_init(): TCP host = localhost > > any help is appreciated, > > thanks, > Jignesh Gandhi > Software Engineer II > Jignesh.Gandhi(a)glenayre.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Serusers mailing list > serusers(a)lists.iptel.org > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

19 years, 6 months

[Serusers] how to determine if src_ip and uri domain are the same?

by Allan

What can I do in order to make a decision based on src_ip and the IP address in the URI domain? I have calls between UAs located behind the same NAT on the other end of a low bandwidth WAN circuit and want the ability to not force the call through rtp_proxy. In practice this works ok with a fixed IP address but I am unsure how to make the process more dynamic. I am new to SER and still learning the features and scripting language so I apologize of this topic is covered somewhere else. Regards, Allan ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

19 years, 6 months

[Serusers] SIP Invite request coming on the Source port of Register request

by mahesh

Hi All, To be more specific on the problem, I am using the following network configuration. HOST1 XP---FW/NAT---Internet---HOST2 XP Network Configuraton: Host1's IP address : 172.16.4.8 FW Internal address: 172.16.4.1 FW external address: 202.125.84.163 Host2's IP address : 202.125.84.164 SER(public server) : 195.37.77.99 FW/NAT has SIP-ALG implementation. SJPhone is installed on both Host1 and Host2. Now Host1 registers with the SIP proxy server. The register request after the NAT(ALG) process has the src port of 55001(IP:202.125.84.163) and the contact port of 60002(IP:202.125.84.163). Similarly SJphone on Host2 is also registered with the proxy server. Now when a call is made to Host1 from Host2 using SJPhone, the SIP invite request coming from Host2 is sent to the proxy server, which in turn is sending it to 202.125.84.163 on port 55001(source port of register). This request is supposed to come on port 60002(contact port of register). A month back when i tested in the same configuration, the request from the external machine was coming on the contact port of the register request(according to the RFC 3261). But when i tested it yesterday it was having the mentioned problem behavior. Could someone please let me know if anything is changed in the proxy server(SER) which is causing this behavior. Also how this behavior can be avoided. Thanks in advance. Best Regards Mahesh

19 years, 6 months

← Newer
1
...
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

sr-users November 2004