sr-users February 2005

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

215 participants
467 discussions

[Serusers] Your mail send to biswas@stprkl.soft.net has been received.

by Mrinmoy Biswas

Your mail send to biswas(a)stprkl.soft.net has been received. Will reply as soon as I get back. Thank you. Regards, Mrinmoy Biswas

19 years, 2 months

Re: [Serusers] no audio if clients are behind different nat

by Ashling O'Driscoll

Thanks for the reply Philip. However, before I try STUN and totally abandon nathelper and rtpproxy,I just want to see if anyone know how to solve the below problem. I would suspect since the person who posted the original thread didnt reply after Klaus suggested that he include force_rtp_proxy that he managed to make it work. What I dont understand is where the force_rtp_proxy should be included since it was already in the original config file as shown below. Any pointers appreciated. (I also tried changing fix_nated_sdp ("1") to ("3") but that didnt work) Regards, Aisling. ---- Original Message ---- From: lintenhofer(a)aon.at To: ashling.odriscoll(a)cit.ie Subject: Re: [Serusers] no audio if clients are behind different nat Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:22:58 +0100 >Ashling O'Driscoll schrieb: > >>Hi, >> >>I have the exact same problem as described in the below email which >I >>found on the serusers mailing archives. That is clients behind the >>same nat can ring each other and transmit audio but if a client >tries >>to ring a client behind another nat no audio is transmitted. >>According to the below email this is because the sdp is not >rewritten >>correctly. The below solution mentions calling force_rtpproxy but >>that function is called in the original config (see below)...Is >there >>a specific plce that it should be invoked? >> >>Thank you, >>Aisling. >> >>You have to call force_rtpproxy -> this will rewrite the IP address >>and >>port with the one of the rtpproxy. >> >>klaus >> >>Sun Yen-Rong (Dan) wrote: >> >> >> >>>Hi Klaus, >>>Firstly, thanks for your help. I used ethereal to capture the SIP >>>messages, and found out that the SDP in the forwarded INIVITE and >>> >>> >>200 OK >> >> >>>message are not rewritten correctly. As a result, the client with a >>>public IP address is sending RTP packets to the private IP address >>> >>> >>of >> >> >>>the other client who is behind a NAT. One seruser suggested me to >>> >>> >>use >> >> >>>fix_nated_sdp("3") instead of fix_nated_sdp("1"), however, it >didn't >>>solve my problem. Do I also need to add a parameter to other >>> >>> >>nathelper >> >> >>>functions as well? >>> >>>Regards, >>>Dan. >>> >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Klaus Darilion [mailto:klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at] >>>Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 9:45 PM >>>To: Sun Yen-Rong (Dan) >>>Cc: serusers at iptel.org >>>Subject: Re: [Serusers] no audio problem if clients behind NATs >>> >>>use a packet sniffer (ethereal or ngrep) and watch the SIP messages >>> >>> >>at >> >> >>>the SIP proxy. Take a look at the sdp in the forwarded INVITE and >>> >>> >>200 OK >> >> >>>message and verify that the IP address and port in the SDP are >>> >>> >>rewritten >> >> >>>correctly and points to the rtpproxy. >>> >>>regards, >>>klaus >>> >>>Sun Yen-Rong (Dan) wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>Hi all, >>>> >>>>I am using ser 0.8.12 with nathelper and rtpproxy. When I tried to >>>> >>>> >>>make >>> >>> >>> >>>>a call between two clients which are behind the same NAT, >everything >>>>work fine. However, when I try to make a call between clients >which >>>> >>>> >>>are >>> >>> >>> >>>>behind different NATs, niether client can hear each other's audio. >>>> >>>> >>my >> >> >>>>configuration file is shown in the end of this message. Can >someone >>>> >>>> >>>help >>> >>> >>> >>>>me, please? >>>> >>>>Thanks, >>>> >>>>Dan. >>>> >>>># >>>># $Id: nathelper.cfg,v 1.1.2.1 2003/11/24 14:47:18 janakj Exp $ >>>># >>>># simple quick-start config script including nathelper support >>>> >>>># This default script includes nathelper support. To make it work >>>># you will also have to install Maxim's RTP proxy. The proxy is >>>> >>>> >>>enforced >>> >>> >>> >>>># if one of the parties is behind a NAT. >>>># >>>># If you have an endpoing in the public internet which is known to >>>># support symmetric RTP (Cisco PSTN gateway or voicemail, for >>>> >>>> >>>example), >>> >>> >>> >>>># then you don't have to force RTP proxy. If you don't want to >>>> >>>> >>enforce >> >> >>>># RTP proxy for some destinations than simply use t_relay() >instead >>>> >>>> >>of >> >> >>>># route(1) >>>># >>>># Sections marked with !! Nathelper contain modifications for >>>> >>>> >>>nathelper >>> >>> >>> >>>># >>>># NOTE !! This config is EXPERIMENTAL ! >>>># >>>># ----------- global configuration parameters >>>> >>>> >>------------------------ >> >> >>>>debug=3 # debug level (cmd line: -dddddddddd) >>>>fork=yes >>>>log_stderror=no # (cmd line: -E) >>>> >>>>check_via=no # (cmd. line: -v) >>>>dns=no # (cmd. line: -r) >>>>rev_dns=no # (cmd. line: -R) >>>>port=5060 >>>>children=4 >>>>fifo="/tmp/ser_fifo" >>>> >>>># ------------------ module loading >>>> >>>> >>---------------------------------- >> >> >>>>",# >>>># $Id: nathelper.cfg,v 1.2 2003/04/15 20:35:29 jiri Exp $ >>>># >>>># example script showing use of nathelper module >>>># (incomplete for sake of brevity) >>>># >>>> >>>># ----------- global configuration parameters >>>> >>>> >>------------------------ >> >> >>>># ------------------ module loading >>>> >>>> >>---------------------------------- >> >> >>>>loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so" >>>>loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/tm.so" >>>>loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/rr.so" >>>>loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/maxfwd.so" >>>>loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/usrloc.so" >>>>loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/registrar.so" >>>>loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/textops.so" >>>> >>>># !! Nathelper >>>>loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/nathelper.so" >>>> >>>># ----------------- setting module-specific parameters >>>> >>>> >>--------------- >> >> >>>># -- usrloc params -- >>>> >>>>modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 0) >>>> >>>># -- rr params -- >>>># add value to ;lr param to make some broken UAs happy >>>>modparam("rr", "enable_full_lr", 1) >>>> >>>># !! Nathelper >>>>modparam("registrar", "nat_flag", 6) >>>>modparam("nathelper", "natping_interval", 30) # Ping interval 30 s >>>>modparam("nathelper", "ping_nated_only", 1) # Ping only clients >>>> >>>> >>>behind >>> >>> >>> >>>>NAT >>>> >>>># ------------------------- request routing logic >>>> >>>> >>------------------- >> >> >>>># main routing logic >>>> >>>>route{ >>>> >>>> # initial sanity checks -- messages with >>>> # max_forwards==0, or excessively long requests >>>> if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) { >>>> sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops"); >>>> break; >>>> }; >>>> if (msg:len >= max_len ) { >>>> sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); >>>> break; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> # !! Nathelper >>>> # Special handling for NATed clients; first, NAT test is >>>> # executed: it looks for via!=received and RFC1918 addresses >>>> # in Contact (may fail if line-folding is used); also, >>>> # the received test should, if completed, should check all >>>> # vias for rpesence of received >>>> if (nat_uac_test("3")) { >>>> # Allow RR-ed requests, as these may indicate that >>>> # a NAT-enabled proxy takes care of it; unless it is >>>> # a REGISTER >>>> >>>> if (method == "REGISTER" || ! search("^Record-Route:")) >>>> >>>> >>>{ >>> >>> >>> >>>> log("LOG: Someone trying to register from private >>>> >>>> >>>IP, >>> >>> >>> >>>>rewriting\n"); >>>> >>>> # This will work only for user agents that support >>>> >>>> >>>symmetric >>> >>> >>> >>>> # communication. We tested quite many of them and >>>> >>>> >>>majority is >>> >>> >>> >>>> # smart enough to be symmetric. In some phones it >>>> >>>> >>>takes a >>> >>> >>> >>>>configuration >>>> # option. With Cisco 7960, it is called >>>> >>>> >>>NAT_Enable=Yes, with >>> >>> >>> >>>>kphone it is >>>> # called "symmetric media" and "symmetric >>>> >>>> >>>signalling". >>> >>> >>> >>>> fix_nated_contact(); # Rewrite contact with source >>>> >>>> >>>IP of >>> >>> >>> >>>>signalling >>>> if (method == "INVITE") { >>>> fix_nated_sdp("1"); # Add direction=active to >>>> >>>> >>>SDP >>> >>> >>> >>>> }; >>>> force_rport(); # Add rport parameter to topmost Via >>>> setflag(6); # Mark as NATed >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> # we record-route all messages -- to make sure that >>>> # subsequent messages will go through our proxy; that's >>>> # particularly good if upstream and downstream entities >>>> # use different transport protocol >>>> if (!method=="REGISTER") record_route(); >>>> >>>> # subsequent messages withing a dialog should take the >>>> # path determined by record-routing >>>> if (loose_route()) { >>>> # mark routing logic in request >>>> append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n"); >>>> route(1); >>>> break; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> if (!uri==myself) { >>>> # mark routing logic in request >>>> append_hf("P-hint: outbound\r\n"); >>>> route(1); >>>> break; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> # if the request is for other domain use UsrLoc >>>> # (in case, it does not work, use the following command >>>> # with proper names and addresses in it) >>>> if (uri==myself) { >>>> >>>> if (method=="REGISTER") { >>>> >>>># Uncomment this if you want to use digest authentication >>>># if (!www_authorize("iptel.org", "subscriber")) { >>>># www_challenge("iptel.org", "0"); >>>># break; >>>># }; >>>> >>>> save("location"); >>>> break; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> lookup("aliases"); >>>> if (!uri==myself) { >>>> append_hf("P-hint: outbound alias\r\n"); >>>> route(1); >>>> break; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> # native SIP destinations are handled using our USRLOC >>>> >>>> >>>DB >>> >>> >>> >>>> if (!lookup("location")) { >>>> sl_send_reply("404", "Not Found"); >>>> break; >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> append_hf("P-hint: usrloc applied\r\n"); >>>> route(1); >>>>} >>>> >>>>route[1] >>>>{ >>>> # !! Nathelper >>>> if (uri=~"[@:](192\.168\.|10\.|172\.(1[6-9]|2[0-9]|3[0-1])\.)" >>>> >>>> >>>&& >>> >>> >>> >>>>!search("^Route:")){ >>>> sl_send_reply("479", "We don't forward to private IP >>>> >>>> >>>addresses"); >>> >>> >>> >>>> break; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> # if client or server know to be behind a NAT, enable relay >>>> if (isflagset(6)) { >>>> force_rtp_proxy(); >>>> }; >>>> >>>> # NAT processing of replies; apply to all transactions (for >>>> >>>> >>>example, >>> >>> >>> >>>> # re-INVITEs from public to private UA are hard to identify as >>>> # NATed at the moment of request processing); look at replies >>>> t_on_reply("1"); >>>> >>>> # send it out now; use stateful forwarding as it works reliably >>>> # even for UDP2TCP >>>> if (!t_relay()) { >>>> sl_reply_error(); >>>> }; >>>>} >>>> >>>># !! Nathelper >>>>onreply_route[1] { >>>> # NATed transaction ? >>>> if (isflagset(6) && status =~ "(183)|2[0-9][0-9]") { >>>> fix_nated_contact(); >>>> force_rtp_proxy(); >>>> # otherwise, is it a transaction behind a NAT and we did not >>>> # know at time of request processing ? (RFC1918 contacts) >>>> } else if (nat_uac_test("1")) { >>>> fix_nated_contact(); >>>> }; >>>>} >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>-------------------Legal >Disclaimer--------------------------------------- >> >>The above electronic mail transmission is confidential and intended >only for the person to whom it is addressed. Its contents may be >protected by legal and/or professional privilege. Should it be >received by you in error please contact the sender at the above >quoted email address. Any unauthorised form of reproduction of this >message is strictly prohibited. The Institute does not guarantee the >security of any information electronically transmitted and is not >liable if the information contained in this communication is not a >proper and complete record of the message as transmitted by the >sender nor for any delay in its receipt. >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Serusers mailing list >>Serusers(a)iptel.org >>http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >> >> >> >If it is not symmetric NAT, try to ask a STUN Server outside in the >internet. You just need a client which supports STUN (and it works)! >The >clients learn about the NAT (kind of NAT and outbound address) and >change their SDP therefore. A good software choice is XTen lite. A >STUN >Server is at sip.technikum-wien.at (Ports 3478, 3479) > >regards, >Philipp > > >-------------------Legal >Disclaimer--------------------------------------- > >The above electronic mail transmission is confidential and intended >only for the person to whom it is addressed. Its contents may be >protected by legal and/or professional privilege. Should it be >received by you in error please contact the sender at the above >quoted email address. Any unauthorised form of reproduction of this >message is strictly prohibited. The Institute does not guarantee the >security of any information electronically transmitted and is not >liable if the information contained in this communication is not a >proper and complete record of the message as transmitted by the >sender nor for any delay in its receipt. > -------------------Legal Disclaimer--------------------------------------- The above electronic mail transmission is confidential and intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Its contents may be protected by legal and/or professional privilege. Should it be received by you in error please contact the sender at the above quoted email address. Any unauthorised form of reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited. The Institute does not guarantee the security of any information electronically transmitted and is not liable if the information contained in this communication is not a proper and complete record of the message as transmitted by the sender nor for any delay in its receipt.

19 years, 2 months

[Serusers] NAT Keep alive message in SER.

by Ricardo Martinez

Hello list, I have a question regarding to the NAT keep alive message sent by a Lynksys PAP2 device. I configured the NAT keep Alive message as NOTIFY. When this messsage arrives to SER the next configuration line handle it. if (method=="NOTIFY") { break; }; i'm not sure if this behavior is ok. Does SER must answer to the NOTIFY (keep alive messages).?? if the answer is yes, which message is the answer to a NOTIFY? is better to do the NAT keep alive message with a REGISTER? I hope that someone could help me Ricardo Martinez.-

19 years, 2 months

[Serusers] 500 Server Internal Error

by ron

Hi All, Can anyone help me on this. On my ngrep I saw this 212.218.189.14:5060 -> 212.218.189.15:5060 SIP2.0 500 Server Internal Error The source, 212.218.189.14, is the gateway, the destination, 212.218.189.15, is the SIP server. What does this mean? Does it men the erro is coming from the gateway and that there is no problem on the SIP server? I don't understand the 500 error. Thank you in advanced Regards, Ron -- -- iTouch Communications, Inc.

19 years, 2 months

[Serusers] SER users disable account

by Walter Willis

somebody knows like desabilitar, the user without having to erase it of the data base? exists algun field in the table to subscriber that desabilite to the user of login or something asi?

19 years, 2 months

[Serusers] presence in ser

by Meena

Hi, I am using Windows Messenger 5.1. Do I have to use mysql database for presence to work, or should the clients be able to see each other even without it? Right now, I can sign in, but cannot see my contacts even though they are online. Thanks, Meena.

19 years, 2 months

[Serusers] Codec configuration

by Jain, Hitesh

Hi all, If I need to shut off the Media Attribute: rtpmap:3 GSM/8000 in SER, which file do I need to make changes in? Also does anyone have any idea what rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000 is? Thanks, Hitesh.

19 years, 2 months

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 February 2005