Paul,
Here is a cut and paste of a posting you did back on Dec 08, 2004.
You said "Here is a complete ser.cfg I posted a few days ago which uses
rtpproxy." However you did not include the cfg info as you intended
Could you please point to where you posted that info.
Thanks
KOFI
Success is a state of Mind
I've been looking through the admin manual and haven't found what I'm
looking for yet.
I point my SIP client to, say, domainname.com, and on my DNS server, I
point this to my SER system's IP address, say, 10.10.10.10.
When I had SIP_DOMAIN=10.10.10.10, I experienced long delays between
pressing hangup and the call actually being hung up.
When I changed this to SIP_DOMAIN=domainname.com and ran
/etc/init.d/ser restart, the behaviour is as expected.
I put export SIP_DOMAIN=domainname.com into /etc/profile and reboot
the system, I try dialing and then hanging up again, and it's back to
the same behaviour I mentioned above. If I run /etc/init.d/ser
restart, then it is fixed again.
Am I doing something wrong here? I don't want to have to run a manual
restart after every system boot.
Thanks in advance.
I'd like to run sems couppled with two ser sessions.
I have to run 0.8.14 because i need serweb.
What sems version I have to use and where to download it?
In fact I tried the cvs and I got some very strange problem and using the 0.1.0 I get: wrong FIFO interface version!
please help!
Thanks
Rosario
Hi All,
I'm trying to install 0.9.0, I had some problems compiling:
ext and extcmd is not getting compiled. Are these modules critical?
This is the error on ext modules:
ext.c: In function `ext_rewrite':
ext.c:340: warning: passing arg 4 of `append_branch' makes pointer from
integer without a cast
ext.c:340: error: too few arguments to function `append_branch'
make: *** [ext.o] Error 1
This is the error on the extcmd.c
extcmd_funcs.c: In function `tuac_callback':
extcmd_funcs.c:327: error: structure has no member named `cbp'
extcmd_funcs.c:336: error: structure has no member named `cbp'
extcmd_funcs.c: In function `send_sip_req':
extcmd_funcs.c:435: warning: passing arg 7 of pointer to function from
incompatible pointer type
make: *** [extcmd_funcs.o] Error 1
Thank you in advanced
nhadie
Hi,
I'm not an expert so maybe my guessings are not wright, but I'll try to
help:
There are several possiblities for these "SER time-outs".
The first is the DNS resolving process. When a SER child is making a
DNS query it is blocked, and it does not answer to further incoming
queries. Therefore if all your childs are making this DNS queries, no
process will be available for responding the new requests.
To solve this situation, use stateful behaviour because only the first
request within a transaction requiring DNS resolution will *block*. In
the other hand, if you use stateless SER, ALL requests will require a
DNS query...
(by the way, this information is taken from the SER's admin
guide....have all of the mailing-list subscribers read it? I recomend
it....)
Another possibility is the flexible-but-unreliable exec calls from SER
config file. It is also stated in the admin guide that the use of exec
reduces a lot SER performance and you should be really careful using
them.......having a SER child stoped for an uncertain amount of time
until the exec command finishes can lead to "blocking" phases, for
instance.
One comment: why not changing the current DNS blocking queries for a
non-blocking queries such as reSIProcate does with ARES library??? I
have no idea if it would be a high effort in the SER core...it's just a
possible enhancement....
I hope I was not *completely* wrong and I could help you,
Samuel.
Unclassified.
>>> "Matt Schulte" <mschulte(a)netlogic.net> 02/18/05 03:55PM >>>
I've had this problem too, especially running syslog debug or external
processes. what ver of ser are you running? We had to ditch a lot of
our
external processes because I assumed they took too long to run, no one
on the list was any help so I just gave up. Not being a coder is very
frustrating..
-----Original Message-----
From: AJ Grinnell [mailto:ajgrinnell@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 8:44 AM
To: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Subject: [Serusers] SER stops responding
I am having a strange problem with 0.9.0. At random times, SER will
just
stop responding. I run ethereal, and can see INVITEs, REGISTERs and
OPTIONs requests, but SER does not respond to any of them. The process
does not die, and moni tells me that SER is still running, just no
respones. Sometimes SER will recover after a few minutes, most of the
time it doesnt. Any ideas?
_______________________________________________
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
Hi
I am trying to get a call blasting kind of thing setup, where a call to
alias
101 goes to abc(a)xyz.com and qwe(a)xyz.com
In 0.8.x this seemed possible by adding alias 101 for both addresses, not
sure if this is/was the correct way of doing it, however in 0.10 it
seems as if the username in alias table is set as a primary key, which
means i cant do this, is this a feature, if so, whats the best way of
ringing multiple phones
Iqbal
Dear All,
I am testing a SIP based CPE which is a System On Chip (SOC). SER is
the SIP server. When I make a call from A to B and if B is not picking
up the call, A recieves ringing tone until it is hung up. My question
is:
1. Is the CPE under test failing from the RFC 3261 point of view ?
2. Is there a provision in the SER config file, to terminate an INVITE
transaction if there is no response within a specified amount of time,
say 2 min ?
thanks in advance for your kind replies.
The point of LCR is to lower your own costs, not benefit your customers.
-----Original Message-----
From: Juha Heinanen [mailto:jh@lohi.tutpro.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 3:03 PM
To: Martin Koenig
Cc: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Subject: [Serusers] Re: [Serdev] least cost routing module
Martin Koenig writes:
> Another question, wouldn't it make sense to allow the lcr engine to
> somehow rewrite the RURI for a specific call destination, i.e. add a
> prefix or suffix to the RURI? Or maybe even different header fields
for
> each destination?
everything is possible, but as i said before, i add features that my
customers are not asking only if i have spare time.
-- juha
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
FYI...
if (!method == "CANCEL") {
if (!is_user_in("Credentials", "int")) {
sl_send_reply("403", "No access");
break;
}
}
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Schulte
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 1:24 PM
To: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Subject: [Serusers] CANCEL "forbidden"
Someone posted awhile back how to make cancel's *not* challenge/auth? I
can't find it anywhere, anyone have that post?
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
