Hi,
I want to have voicemail feature when phone is busy or on no answer
My configuration file is like that:
..
# route block used only to have voicemail if phone is busy or on no
answer
route[6] {
append_branch();
avp_db_load("$ruri", "$avp(email)/$email_scheme");
if(!t_write_unix("/tmp/sems_socket",
"voicemail/voicemail_headers")) {
t_reply("500", "error contacting sems");
return;
}
route(5);
route(4);
route(1);
}
failure_route[1] {
# flagset 26 <=> if phone busy we want a voicemail
if ( (isflagset(26)) && (t_check_status("486")) ) {
resetflag(26);
route(6);
return;
}
# flagset 27 <=> on no answer we want a voicemail
if ( (isflagset(27)) && (t_check_status("408")) ){
resetflag(27);
route(6);
return;
}
end_media_session();
}
Now if I use a "default.template" (used by the voicemail module) with the
line:
from:voicemail@%domain%,
SEMS cannot send correctly a email:
(3988) INFO: connect (AmSmtpClient.cpp:96): 127.0.0.1 welcomes us
(3988) DEBUG: send_line (AmSmtpClient.cpp:173): SENDED: HELO
127.0.0.1
(3988) DEBUG: read_line (AmSmtpClient.cpp:145): RECEIVED: 250
christophe.rv.fr
(3988) DEBUG: run (AmMail.cpp:119): Mail deamon starting its work
(3988) DEBUG: send_line (AmSmtpClient.cpp:173): SENDED: mail from:
<voicemail(a)172.20.250.1>
(3988) DEBUG: read_line (AmSmtpClient.cpp:145): RECEIVED: 501 Bad
address syntax
SEMS is trying to send a mail from "voicemail(a)172.20.250.1" ! The SMTP
server doesn't accept an IP and this IP is the IP of the callee SIP device .
Strange. It's important to notice that "voicemail" works fine when is used
on a phone not registered with the line "from:voicemail@%domain%" in file
"default.template" .
In this case the SEMS log file is:
(4494) INFO: connect (AmSmtpClient.cpp:96): 127.0.0.1 welcomes us
(4494) DEBUG: send_line (AmSmtpClient.cpp:173): SENDED: HELO
127.0.0.1
(4494) DEBUG: read_line (AmSmtpClient.cpp:145): RECEIVED: 250
christophe.rv.fr
(4494) DEBUG: run (AmMail.cpp:119): Mail deamon starting its work
(4494) DEBUG: send_line (AmSmtpClient.cpp:173): SENDED: mail from:
<voicemail(a)christophe.rv.fr>
(4494) DEBUG: read_line (AmSmtpClient.cpp:145): RECEIVED: 250 Ok
So I suspect the "%domain%" in "default.template" file is not correctly read
by the module "voicemail" after a "failure_route" or after a
"append_branch".
What I must change in my OpenSER configuration file in order to resolve this
problem ?
NOTE: I'm using sems-0.1.1 in revision 68
Thanks in advance,
Christophe
Hello!
Can anyone provide sample config to proxy any calls.
Thank you.
--
Pavel D.Kuzin
System Administrator
Nodex ISP
St. Petersburg, Russia
pk(a)nodex.ru
http://nodex.ru
Hi all, please help me....
Nowadays, i've been trying to implemented the SMS Module (SIP to GSM) using OpenSER 1.0.0, but never the lles, the tutorials that had given at www.openser.org are so poor...
Could you please help me to find more added tutorial guide to implemented the SMS Module (SIP to GSM) ?
I wanna know, what kind of facilities that needed to build this module and make it run correctly (such as DNS,etc), step by step to build this module?
i hope your opinion?
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
Hi,
Is there any Ser function for lookup contents in a given column of the
subscriber table, like the *is_user_in* function that looks up in group
table?
Thanks,
Ricardo.
As an educational tool, I'm trying to write a pure proxy using
openser. This proxy doesn't have users or domains or gateways,
it just shuffles messages that happen to land on it.
I'm starting with REGISTER where I have simply this:
t_on_reply("10");
t_on_failure("10");
t_relay();
The onreply and onfailure callbacks just log stuff.
The openser cookbook says:
The implicit action after execution of the main route block is to drop
the SIP request. To send a reply or forward the request, explicit
actions must be called inside the route block.
To find what happens in other route blocks (onreply, etc.), I searched
the cookbook for "implicit" and learned:
implicit action for branch_route is to forward the request.
implicit action for onreply_route is to send the reply upstream
according to Via header
And that's all there is. Is there more written somewhere else?
What I noticed is that informational responses (1xx) are not relayed
by openser, but Final (200) or Client Error (401) are relayed.
Is this conclusion correct?
This implicit behaviour seems a little odd to me; I would
think that if I've got a t_on_reply out there then I'm saying
"Hey, I'll handle it" but in fact I cannot handle it (t_relay is
not allowed in an onreply block).
So, I must be missing something in my understanding...
I'ld appreciate it if someone could clarify for me.
Thanks,
-mark
Consider the case where there are two fones, both registered as the same subscriber (foo(a)bar.com)
I have max_contacts == 2, therefore the fones actually register
I now add a *third* fone, also registered as foo(a)bar.com
Since max_contacts == 2, this fone does *not* register.
However, if a user makes a call from this fone, the call will go through. I wish to prevent this.
What do I do? Something obvious that I am missing?
Or something weird with twiddling with the RURI and using "registered(domain)"?
Or heavy AVP mucking around?
Cheers
--
*******************************************
Mahesh Paolini-Subramanya (703) 386-1500 x9100
CTO mahesh(a)aptela.com
Aptela, Inc. http://www.aptela.com
"Aptela: How Business Answers The Call"
*******************************************
Thanks,
Now that I understand what the received avp is for in the registrar
module, that seems to make a lot more sense. I was unaware at the time
how to go about doing that, and with the small number of replies I got,
the only logical conclusion was to modify some functions that performed
similarly that I knew worked 100% (all this because of a deadline). The
information is helpful, since I will likely have to use it in a future
implementation.
Justin Pearce
Information Technology/Programming
Price Video Productions
JustinP(a)PriceVideo.com
361-572-3810
800-733-3810
Fax: 361-572-3894
www.PriceVideo.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu [mailto:bogdan@voice-system.ro]
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 9:04 AM
To: Justin Pearce
Cc: users(a)openser.org
Subject: Re: [Users] Rewriting Contact HF port
Justin,
just as an idea, you could upload the contact into an AVP (via pseudo
variables) and then use a regexp to change the port part....so, you can
do it only via script functions.
regards,
bogdan
Justin Pearce wrote:
>Hi Bogdan,
>
>I knew that Nathelper did some rewriting, but the circumstances
required
>that the thing record the private IP and a certain known port instead
of
>the public IP as a contact address (using fix_nated_register() to save
>the other address). I wound up borrowing the code from the Nathelper
>module and modifying it to accept a port argument and made it a
separate
>module. This way, it only rewrote the port and not left everything else
>untouched.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Justin Pearce
>Information Technology/Programming
>Price Video Productions
>JustinP(a)PriceVideo.com
>361-572-3810
>800-733-3810
>Fax: 361-572-3894
>www.PriceVideo.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu [mailto:bogdan@voice-system.ro]
>Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 6:19 AM
>To: Justin Pearce
>Cc: Klaus Darilion; users(a)openser.org
>Subject: Re: [Users] Rewriting Contact HF port
>
>Hi Justin,
>
>if you need save(location) to save as "received" a custom uri, you just
>need to set an avp with the uri you need to be saved. See:
> http://openser.org/docs/modules/1.1.x/registrar.html#AEN211
>It's exactly what nathelper does.
>
>regards,
>bogdan
>
>Justin Pearce wrote:
>
>
>
>>Thanks, Klaus
>>
>>It looks like I'll have to make something similar to the nathelper
>>module to do what I need.
>>
>>Justin Pearce
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Klaus Darilion [mailto:klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at]
>>Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 1:43 AM
>>To: Justin Pearce
>>Cc: users(a)openser.org
>>Subject: Re: [Users] Rewriting Contact HF port
>>
>>Justin Pearce wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>I am wondering if there is a good way to rewrite the port in the
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>contact
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>header in OpenSER 1.0.1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>1. Why do you want to rewrite the port to fixed port? NAT problems?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>before it is stored in the location table?(I'm using the MySQL
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>database
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>backend).
>>>
>>>Thus far, I am using "subst(/^(Contact.+):[0-9]+(.+)$/\1:5060\2/ig);"
>>>just before I do
>>>
>>>"save("location");", but that does not seem to be working.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>subst will be applied before the message is forwarded. Thus, save()
>>
>>
>sees
>
>
>>the original Contact header. You either loop the modified message to
>>
>>
>the
>
>
>>SIP proxy again or you write your own function (similar to the
function
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>in nathelper module)
>>
>>regards
>>klaus
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Suggestions?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Justin Pearce
>>>
>>>Information Technology/Programming
>>>
>>>Price Video Productions
>>>
>>>JustinP(a)PriceVideo.com <mailto:JustinP@PriceVideo.com>
>>>
>>>361-572-3810
>>>
>>>800-733-3810
>>>
>>>Fax: 361-572-3894
>>>
>>>www.PriceVideo.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>>
>>
>-
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Users mailing list
>>>Users(a)openser.org
>>>http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Users mailing list
>>Users(a)openser.org
>>http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
I don't think I'm using them, unless there's a bug in Kmail.
Mike
On Friday 11 August 2006 01:14, Louis Alexander wrote:
> Btw, all emails I'm getting on this thread are blank. Are you guys using
> PGP signatures? I think my outlook has an issue with that
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: users-bounces(a)openser.org [mailto:users-bounces@openser.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Williams
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 12:35 PM
> To: users(a)openser.org
> Subject: Re: [Users] OpenSER administrator issue
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended
> recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential
> information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied,
> disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an
> intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any
> attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you.
Hello all.
I've been doing some experimentation with both CVS HEAD and 0.9.6 of
SER and version 1.1.0 of OpenSER.
It appears that there is a TCP bug in SER which has been fixed in
OpenSER. I've seen various posts in the past on the serdev and the
serusers lists regarding this issue but with no definitive solution.
Are there any plans to merge some of the great work of the OpenSER
developers back into SER, such as this fix for TCP?
Below is the logfile I receive when I try to place a call from a UDP
to a TCP device using CVS HEAD of SER. The same routing logic in
ser.cfg works perfectly in openser.cfg.
Aug 17 19:03:33 testbox /usr/sbin/ser[32534]: ERROR:
tcp_blocking_connect: poll error: flags 18
Aug 17 19:03:33 testbox /usr/sbin/ser[32534]: ERROR:
tcp_blocking_connect: SO_ERROR (113) No route to host
Aug 17 19:03:33 testbox /usr/sbin/ser[32534]: ERROR: tcpconn_connect:
tcp_blocking_connect failed
Aug 17 19:03:33 testbox /usr/sbin/ser[32534]: ERROR: tcp_send: connect failed
Aug 17 19:03:33 testbox /usr/sbin/ser[32534]: msg_send: ERROR: tcp_send failed
Aug 17 19:03:33 testbox /usr/sbin/ser[32534]: ERROR: t_forward_nonack:
sending request failed
Aug 17 19:03:33 sg1test /usr/sbin/ser[32534]: ERROR: sl_reply_error
used: Unfortunately error on sending to next hop occurred (477/SL)
Does anyone have any ideas on how to get this fixed in CVS HEAD of
SER? I've tried some backporting of the changes to the tcp_* files
from OpenSER to SER but have not had any luck as of yet as I'm not
fully sure of how the code is supposed to be handling each case. This
is to say that I'm just looking at code differences without really
understanding how the code is supposed to work.
I'm happy to do anything I can to help get this resolved in SER's CVS HEAD.
Thanks!
-Curt
I receive "Redirect" with more than one contact destination, and I need to
do fork (parallel).
I am using "t_relay()" to do this, but I didn´t see correct relay because,
now, the Openser sent Invite only one destination. Is there another command
to do relay?
Could some one help me?