-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hello!
I am trying to use AVP operation and I experiment some problems. I
have a line in my configuration like this:
avp_printf("i:45","$dd");
When I restart my OpenSER server, I got this error:
/usr/sbin/openser[8023]: xl_parse_item: error - bad parameters
/usr/sbin/openser[8023]: ERROR:avpops:fixup_printf_avp: unable to get
pseudo-variable in param
/usr/sbin/openser[8023]: ERROR: fix_actions: fixing failed (code=-2)
at cfg line 240
And the line 240 is the line where I call the avp_prinf() function.
I tried with others pseudo-variables but whatever the variable is, I
get always the same problem.
I am using openser-1.1.0-tls with debian package.
Does someone have some help for me?
Thanks
Greg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFa/9yI8gmGeMTr0sRAj2BAKCGmtXvzOi/hy3//l93fBDbyu6CbwCghiuc
WgrGqq2Q6HaGed3IALZ0ess=
=un7M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hello,
We have been using OpenSER quite successfully in the last few weeks to test
various SIP applications. I am wanting to also use SEMS, and have been able
to get a version of that running with OpenSER, but have problems with the
voicemail part of SEMS. Apparently some slight dfferences between SER and
OpenSER, such as avp.so, exist. Is there a document somewhere that
specifies these differences?
Thanks,
=====================
Scott Yagel
syagel(a)PacketCall.net
Hi
My problem is to finish the accounting when some UAC is disconected and no message BYE is send, I can't use the mediaproxy or rtpproxy server. In a previous e-mail I read that is possible to finish the accounting using ping, How I can to configure openser with ping to finish the accounting?
---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!? La mejor conexión a Internet y 2GB extra a tu correo por $100 al mes. http://net.yahoo.com.mx
Hello everyone,
I've already noticed a few posts on that topic, but none has been
answered up to resolution of the problem.
Here is the issue : I am receiving SDP in INVITEs from a Cisco AS5350
(IOS 12.4) gateway that contain two identical c= lines for the same
media.
When using force_rtp_proxy, only the last one is replaced by my proxy
IP. If I use the mangler module on top of it, then both are replaced,
but the one already replaced by force_rtp_proxy is now a concatenation
of twice the proxy IP address.
Is there a way to deal with this so that both lines are replaced ?
Depending on which equipement gets the REQUEST next, either the first or
the second line is used, and this leads to RTP proxy problems.
Best Regards,
Jerome Martin
Spam detection software, running on the system "rat.iptel.org", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: Right, these tests were not objective. I don't know
really objective tests. But I tried to do them. Please, does anybody has
a suggestion what should I set up (config, compilation parameters) to
get more objective tests? [...]
Content analysis details: (6.0 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.1 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO
-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
3.2 NO_DNS_FOR_FROM DNS: Envelope sender has no MX or A DNS records
2.0 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address
[62.245.93.50 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
2.6 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org
[<http://dsbl.org/listing?62.245.93.50>]
1.9 RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL RBL: NJABL: dialup sender did non-local SMTP
[62.245.93.50 listed in combined.njabl.org]
-1.3 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
Spam detection software, running on the system "rat.iptel.org", has
identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 11:16:01PM +0200,
Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote: > As I can see, you get better and
better with openser, maybe you can get > some training so you will be
able to configure and tune it properly to > fit your needs and get the
appropriate results (googling will reveal > some doing trainings for
openser). So which are right, these ones, the > previous ones or the
next testing results? You tested something, which > (I suppose) you are
very familiar with (ser), against something that you > do not know
properly to configure. There are some internals that differ > a lot and
may have quite a lot of performance impact. [...]
Content analysis details: (6.0 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.1 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO
-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
[score: 0.0000]
3.2 NO_DNS_FOR_FROM DNS: Envelope sender has no MX or A DNS records
2.0 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address
[62.245.93.50 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
2.6 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org
[<http://dsbl.org/listing?62.245.93.50>]
1.9 RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL RBL: NJABL: dialup sender did non-local SMTP
[62.245.93.50 listed in combined.njabl.org]
-1.3 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
This was excellent comment, I am surprised people did not answer too much.
I thought too that if we take ser codebase, openser documentation, all
contributed modules, and ser new configuration, and openser release
cycle, we will obtain best of best to our benefit.
Are people confused by subject line and is this why there is so little comments
for this important discussion? I changed the subject line. Hopefuly people who
can assess how difficult taking best-of-best would be will answer for me?
rr
----- Original Message ----
From: Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul <andrei(a)iptel.org>
To: Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at>
Cc: Jiri Kuthan <jiri(a)iptel.org>; serusers(a)iptel.org; Kim Il <kim_il_s(a)yahoo.com>; users(a)openser.org
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 6:59:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Serusers] Re: Fw: [Users] TM : retransmission timers
On Nov 22, 2006 at 12:39, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:
[...]
> > I'm being told that some other personal affiliated with
> >the same company more or less copied-n-pasted TCP code from the allegibly
> >discontinued SER to OpenSER.
>
> That's how open source works. I also copied lots of TLS extensions from
> ser to openser, and even extended it. You can also copy my extensions
> back to ser ... I would love to see it there :-)
I'm sure Jiri has no problem with copying code from ser to openser.
We will do the same with some openser modules and we already did with
some fixes.
The problem here was that it was claimed that ser was dead but in the
same time new code commited in ser was added in openser (so the
openser history writer was not very well intended).
Speaking of copying/porting ser between ser and openser I have a few
requests:
1. If someone sends a fix for code taken from ser, which was not
modified in openser, please could you also bounce the message to the ser
maintainer of that piece of code? If you don't to whom, just send it to me
and I will make sure it reaches the right person.
I'm asking this because my favourite pass-time is not to scan openser
commitlogs for possible fixes to my code
(e.g.:http://openser.cvs.sourceforge.net/openser/sip-server/fastlock.h?r1=1.…)
and this will help me at a minimum effort for the openser developer
part. Of course I think this is true not only for me, but also for other
ser and openser developers and I (and I'm sure anybody else on the ser
team) will return the favour.
2. Please give proper credits for the code you port from ser.
I've saw several times things like: Foo sees something was fixed in ser
or a new small feature was added and sends an email to the openser list
(specifying that the change/patch comes form ser).
The openser developers take the change, but the commit message says
something like: fix for XyZ, credits go to Foo (ser is not mentioned at
all).
It would not only be polite, but it will also help us to filter more
easily through the openser fixes.
Comming back to the openser - ser performance / features discussion, I
think the important part here is how we can improve both sers
(and you should take the test results as a bug report and maybe ask
yourself how did this go through testing, even old sers were faster
then 4000 cps).
If you think only of the users, then a combination of ser & openser will
be the best version. While we disagree (probably) in many respects, I
think there are at least a few clear advantages each version has.
For example openser has very impressive documentation (at this time
ser is very far away from this point of view) and lots of new modules.
ser has also its share of new modules (though I think not so many) and a
better/improved "infrastructure" (core, tm and lots of the "base"
modules - we are actively improving them). ser code tends to also be
more tested and stable (our release policies differ wildly).
I've tried looking at openser core & tm commits and I haven't seen any
significant changes (and this is not a flamewar attempt).
Now the question is why doesn't openser take the core, tm and a big
part of the modules from ser completely and concentrate then in adding
new modules (which you seem to do anyway)? Does it make sense to
re-invent the wheel ?
Everybody (me too) suffers at least a little from the not-invented-here
syndrome, but if you think of the users and at how much of your time it
will save, it will make a lot of sense, even if some compromises would
be necessary.
I think the advantages will far outweigh the problems. Just think about
it, we can concentrate each other on our favourite stuff and we can
benefit much more easily from each other's work.
Andrei
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
The sip_trace table has a field called traced_user. This is undocumented,
and I am finding that this field is empty in the table. Is this currently
unused, or is there something I need to turn on?
Mark
I currently have (open)SER configured to write accounting records to a
radius server. However there is a possibility that the Radius server may
become unavailable. What is the recommended way to deal with this scenario?
Is there a way to cache accounting records? Or is it best to write records
to both flatfile and the radius server? Something like this:
modparam("acc", "db_flag", 1)
modparam("acc", "db_missed_flag", 3)
modparam("acc", "radius_config", "/etc/radiusclient-ng/radiusclient.conf")
modparam("acc", "radius_flag", 1)
modparam("acc", "radius_missed_flag", 3)
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Regards
Cameron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
I am wondering where I can find more information about the
loose_route() function. On Wiki, I can see that it is RFC 3261
compliant and understand what it's the difference between loose
routing and strict routing, but in my conf. file I have a test like:
if(loose_route()){...}
and I 'd like to know what kind of value this function can return or
when can it return something else than true?
Does someone have some information about that?
Thanks
Greg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFZv/iI8gmGeMTr0sRAgg8AKCA9CGb6hI9FEhdE8BMm5nlnXDKkACgjZBA
NFrRWixi2BtEE6e2YrAfg9g=
=ucXk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
