sr-users August 2007

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

169 participants
287 discussions

RE: [OpenSER-Users] Support for strict routing
by Vikas CG. 09 Aug '07

09 Aug '07

Thanks Dan for your reply, One more thing I want to know can we configure openser to be only complaint with RFC 2543 for testing purpose it should support RFC 3261. Thanks, Vikas C.G. -----Original Message----- From: Dan-Cristian Bogos [mailto:dan.bogos@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 6:02 PM To: Vikas CG. Cc: users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] Support for strict routing Hi there Vikas, OpenSER supports both types of routing, strict and loose-routing. It is just a matter of how you decide to handle your request inside routing scripts. In case of strict-routing, it is about keeping the RURI intact and let it flow out without calling loose-routing functions. Cheers, DanB On 8/8/07, Vikas CG. <vikas_cg(a)spanservices.com> wrote: > Hello everyone, > Can any body know whether openser supports for strict routing. > And how can we configure it. > Thanks, > Vikas C.G. > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users(a)openser.org > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >

2 1

[Serusers] WG: SER+ PATTON1 + PATTON2
by Johannes Wagner-Meingassner 08 Aug '07

08 Aug '07

_______________________________ Hi! On the pattons you can create Error Messages when no circuit channel is available And on Ser you have to register a Failure Route to the route of the first patton and the failure route point to the second Patton. ----------------------------------------------------------- PATTON1: profile sip default map cause to-sip no-circuit-channel-available to 486 map cause to-sip resources-unavailable to 486 service hunt-group HUNT-BRI cyclic timeout 1 drop-cause normal-unspecified drop-cause no-circuit-channel-available drop-cause network-out-of-order drop-cause temporary-failure drop-cause switching-equipment-congestion drop-cause access-info-discarded drop-cause circuit-channel-not-available drop-cause resources-unavailable route call 1 dest-interface ISDN_01 route call 2 dest-interface ISDN_02 route call 3 dest-interface ISDN_03 --------------------------------------------------- SER: Ser.cfg: if ( uri=~".*sip:012345" ) # Patton 1 { t_on_failure("1"); t_relay_to_udp("11.11.11.10", "5060"); break; } --------------------------------------------------- failure_route[1] { if (method=="INVITE") { if (t_check_status ("600|486")) #### ErrorCode from Patton 1 { #####call from Patton 1 -- 486 (Busy) ret -- call switch to Patton 2 ###### if ( uri=~".*sip:012345" ) # Costumer xy { append_branch(); t_relay_to_udp("11.11.11.11", "5060"); ##Unterroute ist hier nicht notwendig, break; ##da sich die Verrechnung hier nicht aendert } } } --------------------------------------- I hope it help! Hannes _______________________________ Johannes Wagner-Meingassner -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: serusers-bounces(a)lists.iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] Im Auftrag von pokerino76 Gesendet: Mittwoch, 8. August 2007 18:43 An: serusers Betreff: [Serusers] SER+ PATTON1 + PATTON2 Wichtigkeit: Hoch I have 2 patton from 8 channels everyone. I must make the sum of the channels 8+8=16. The patton they are connects to with the SER. How to make the switch of the channels when one of the two is saturate? _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers __________________________________________________________________________________ Dieses Mail wurde vom Infotech SecureMail Service ueberprueft und fuer sicher befunden. Fuer weitere Informationen zu Infotech SecureMail Service waehlen Sie bitte: www.infotech.at This email has been scanned by Infotech SecureMail Service and it has been classified as secure. For more information on Infotech SecureMail direct your web browser to: www.infotech.at

1 0

[OpenSER-Users] Issue calling use_media_proxy() at on_reply_route.
by Sergio Gutierrez 08 Aug '07

08 Aug '07

Hello all. We are facing some problems in our deployment of OpenSER, related to NAT Traversal solution using MediaProxy. In our scenario, using the the sample configuration NAT detection works right for REGISTER method, and for INVITE's sent from clients behind NAT, but, incoming calls originated from transparent clients, directed to clients behind NAT do not work, and do not pass through MediaProxy. Services based on re-INVITES do not work either. To solve that issue, we tried to intercept the 200 OK answer coming from NAT client, so that we could call use_media_proxy(), but, we get the error: "Empty Response from media_proxy()" Our configuration is more or less like this: # In the beginning of the main route if(client_nat_test("7")) { setflag(2); fix_contact(); }; ..... if(is_method("INVITE")) { if(isflagset(2)) { use_media_proxy(); }; t_on_reply("1"); } .... on_reply_route[1] { if (status =~ "(18[0-3])|(2[0-9][0-9])|(1[0-9][0-9])") { if (client_nat_test("3")) { fix_contact(); use_media_proxy(); } } } That is a very brief configuration fragment, but it is more or less the schema of configuration we are using. So far, our solution to be able to have the whole services working is marking all the calls so that they pass through the mediaproxy, but we are not sure if that is a good solution. Thanks in advance for every hint or suggestion. Kind regards *Sergio Armando Gutiérrez Betancur* *S**ubdirección **A**plicaciones **de **S**ervicios **C**onvergentes** UNE - EPM Telecomunicaciones * *Tel: 054 3802956* *Email: saguti(a)gmail.com*

3 4

[Serusers] SER+ PATTON1 + PATTON2
by pokerino76 08 Aug '07

08 Aug '07

I have 2 patton from 8 channels everyone. I must make the sum of the channels 8+8=16. The patton they are connects to with the SER. How to make the switch of the channels when one of the two is saturate?

1 0

[OpenSER-Users] RE: NAT question
by Papadopoulos Georgios 08 Aug '07

08 Aug '07

Hi Inaki, Why would you leave out the "4" flag test in nat_uac_test() for the replies? Of course if I leave out the "2" test then my example works (I have tested it) but I am afraid that this will break some other NATed senario. And if leave out the "2" test, should I also leave out the "16" test? Best regards George > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 11:53:46 +0200 > From: I?aki Baz Castillo <ibc(a)in.ilimit.es> > Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] NAT question > To: users(a)openser.org > Message-ID: <200708081153.46621.ibc(a)in.ilimit.es> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > El Wednesday 08 August 2007 10:30:54 Papadopoulos Georgios escribiσ: > > Hi Bogdan, > > > > I understand that 200 OK should not be fixed by proxyA. Maybe what I > > don't understand is what nat_uac_test("2") does and when to use it. > > > > Following is an example where > > clientA = demo1(a)altecnet.gr > > clientB = sip_test_1(a)i-call.gr > > proxyA = 213.5.43.4 > > proxyB = 213.5.43.134 > > > > When proxyA goes in the onreply_route for the 200 OK, > nat_uac_test("23") > > returns true (I guess because of the "2" flag) and proxyA fixes the > > contact again which is wrong. So, would it be safe to use > > nat_uac_test("23") for the requests and nat_uac_test("21") for the > > replies? I am afraid this would break the simple case with 2 NATed > > clients and only one proxy: > > clientA ------> proxyA ------> clientC > > > Good point. As I think, the correct NAT test for replies is: > nat_uac_test("1") > so we just check if <Contact:> header does contain an RFC1918 > IP address > (private IP address). > > In your case it will work since the <Contact> modified by > proxyB will contain > a non private IP so the NAT check (nat_uac_test("1")) in > proxyA wont detect > the repliy as behind NAT. > > Maybe others test could be done, but I think they should no > valid test that > just compare the received IP with the IP of the contact since > both could be > public IP but different, in which case shouldn't be > applied "fix_nat_contact". > > > Regards. > > > > -- > Iρaki Baz Castillo > ibc(a)in.ilimit.es > Disclaimer The information in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential. It is intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or person responsible for delivering this information to the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately. Unless you are the intended recipient or his/her representative you are not authorized to, and must not, read, copy, distribute, use or retain this message or any part of it. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.

2 1

Re: [Serusers] ODP:Re: ODP:Re: Instant messaging.
by tzieleniewski 08 Aug '07

08 Aug '07

to do this you need to substitute the value of the From Header with anonymous. try to use textops module cheers tomasz dciepiel(a)orange.pl pisze: > I mean, to hide the number the person who is calling, like in GSM. U > can hide the number and the person who answering your call doesn`t see > who is calling. See the attachment. > > cheers, > > Daniel > > > ---Oryginalna wiadomość--- > Nadawca:tzieleniewski <tzieleniewski(a)o2.pl> > Do:dciepiel@orange.pl > Otrzymana:2007-08-08 13:43 > Temat:Re: [Serusers] ODP:Re: Instant messaging. > do you mean call blocking at SIP Proxy?? > > dciepiel(a)orange.pl pisze: > >> Thanx Tomasz, It is very helpful. I have one more question. Do you >> know how to implement CLIR (Calling Line Identification Restriction) >> service? >> >> cheers, >> >> Daniel >> >> ---Oryginalna wiadomość--- >> Nadawca:tzieleniewski <tzieleniewski(a)o2.pl> >> Do:dciepiel@orange.pl >> Otrzymana:2007-08-08 11:18 >> Temat:Re: [Serusers] Instant messaging. >> use msilo module for this >> >> cheers tomasz >> >> dciepiel(a)orange.pl pisze: >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have a short question. Does SER support Instant messaging? If yes, I >>> will be gratefull for any quidelines how to set up it. >>> >>> >>> cheers, >>> >>> Daniel >>> >>> >>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >

1 0

[OpenSER-Users] Support for strict routing
by Vikas CG. 08 Aug '07

08 Aug '07

Hello everyone, Can any body know whether openser supports for strict routing. And how can we configure it. Thanks, Vikas C.G.

2 2

[Serusers] ODP:Re: Instant messaging.
by dciepiel＠orange.pl 08 Aug '07

08 Aug '07

Thanx Tomasz, It is very helpful. I have one more question. Do you know how to implement CLIR (Calling Line Identification Restriction) service? cheers, Daniel ---Oryginalna wiadomość--- Nadawca:tzieleniewski <tzieleniewski(a)o2.pl> Do:dciepiel@orange.pl Otrzymana:2007-08-08 11:18 Temat:Re: [Serusers] Instant messaging. use msilo module for this cheers tomasz dciepiel(a)orange.pl pisze: > Hi, > > I have a short question. Does SER support Instant messaging? If yes, I > will be gratefull for any quidelines how to set up it. > > > cheers, > > Daniel > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Serusers mailing list > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >

2 1

RE: [OpenSER-Users] NAT question
by Papadopoulos Georgios 08 Aug '07

08 Aug '07

Hi Bogdan, I understand that 200 OK should not be fixed by proxyA. Maybe what I don't understand is what nat_uac_test("2") does and when to use it. Following is an example where clientA = demo1(a)altecnet.gr clientB = sip_test_1(a)i-call.gr proxyA = 213.5.43.4 proxyB = 213.5.43.134 When proxyA goes in the onreply_route for the 200 OK, nat_uac_test("23") returns true (I guess because of the "2" flag) and proxyA fixes the contact again which is wrong. So, would it be safe to use nat_uac_test("23") for the requests and nat_uac_test("21") for the replies? I am afraid this would break the simple case with 2 NATed clients and only one proxy: clientA ------> proxyA ------> clientC thank you for your help George # U 2007/08/08 10:11:34.233164 213.5.43.134:5060 -> 213.5.43.4:5060 SIP/2.0 200 Ok. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 213.5.43.4;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK322.eea78413.0. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.39;received=213.5.17.226;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bKc0a801270000 002c46b96cbb000000a000000087. Record-Route: <sip:213.5.43.134;lr=on;ftag=109517115931019>. Record-Route: <sip:213.5.43.4;lr=on;ftag=109517115931019>. From: "222" <sip:demo1@altecnet.gr>;tag=109517115931019. To: <sip:sip_test_1@i-call.gr>;tag=0r8u9ziv3g. Call-ID: 000029DD-5407-0000-3452-00006A3B0000(a)192.168.1.39. CSeq: 2 INVITE. Contact: <sip:sip_test_1@213.5.17.236:5060;transport=udp;line=9yt55o5b>. User-Agent: snom190-3.56w. Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, BYE, REFER, OPTIONS, NOTIFY, SUBSCRIBE, PRACK, MESSAGE, INFO. Allow-Events: talk, hold, refer. Supported: timer, 100rel, replaces. Content-Type: application/sdp. Content-Length: 208. . v=0. o=root 1592588598 1592588598 IN IP4 213.5.17.236. s=call. c=IN IP4 213.5.17.236. t=0 0. m=audio 10116 RTP/AVP 8 101. a=rtpmap:8 pcma/8000. a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000. a=fmtp:101 0-15. a=sendrecv. # U 2007/08/08 10:11:34.234013 213.5.43.4:5060 -> 213.5.17.226:5060 SIP/2.0 200 Ok. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.39;received=213.5.17.226;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bKc0a801270000 002c46b96cbb000000a000000087. Record-Route: <sip:213.5.43.134;lr=on;ftag=109517115931019>. Record-Route: <sip:213.5.43.4;lr=on;ftag=109517115931019>. From: "222" <sip:demo1@altecnet.gr>;tag=109517115931019. To: <sip:sip_test_1@i-call.gr>;tag=0r8u9ziv3g. Call-ID: 000029DD-5407-0000-3452-00006A3B0000(a)192.168.1.39. CSeq: 2 INVITE. Contact: <sip:sip_test_1@213.5.43.134:5060;transport=udp;line=9yt55o5b>. User-Agent: snom190-3.56w. Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, BYE, REFER, OPTIONS, NOTIFY, SUBSCRIBE, PRACK, MESSAGE, INFO. Allow-Events: talk, hold, refer. Supported: timer, 100rel, replaces. Content-Type: application/sdp. Content-Length: 208. P-hint: NATed reply. . v=0. o=root 1592588598 1592588598 IN IP4 213.5.17.236. s=call. c=IN IP4 213.5.17.236. t=0 0. m=audio 10116 RTP/AVP 8 101. a=rtpmap:8 pcma/8000. a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000. a=fmtp:101 0-15. a=sendrecv. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu [mailto:bogdan@voice-system.ro] > Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 9:50 AM > To: Papadopoulos Georgios > Cc: users(a)openser.org > Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] NAT question > > Hi George, > > each proxy should fix what it detects. ProxyA will take care > of the traffic related to A (since it detects A as NATed) and > ProxyB should take care of traffic for B (as it sees B as > nated). So, the 200 OK must be fixed only by proxyB. > > Regards, > bogdan > > Papadopoulos Georgios wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > I need some advice from all you NAT experts. Assume that we > have two > > OpenSER proxies serving two different domains and they both use > > nathelper. Also assume that their configuration is > identical and looks > > roughly like: > > > > route { > > ... > > record_route(); > > > > if (nat_uac_test("23")) { > > if (method!="REGISTER" && > > !is_present_hf("Record-Route")) { > > fix_nated_contact(); > > } > > } > > > > t_on_reply("1"); > > } > > > > onreply_route[1] { > > if (nat_uac_test("23")) { > > fix_nated_contact(); > > }; > > } > > clientA and clientB are both behind NAT. clientA@domainA > > <mailto:clientA@domainA> sends an INVITE to clientB@domainB > > <mailto:clientB@domainB> through proxyA: > > > > clientA@domainA <mailto:clientA@domainA> -----> ProxyA > -----> ProxyB > > ------> clientB@domainB <mailto:clientB@domainB> > > > > ProxyA detects that clientA is behind NAT and fixes the contact. > > ProxyB finds the Record-Route header, so it does not fix > the contact. > > My question is about how to handle the 200 OK. With this > configuration > > both proxies detect that clientB is behind NAT and the contact gets > > fixed twice. Is there a way to avoid this? > > > > thank you > > > > George > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Disclaimer > > > > The information in this e-mail and any attachments is > confidential. It > > is intended solely for the attention and use of the named > > addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or person > > responsible for delivering this information to the intended > recipient, > > please notify the sender immediately. Unless you are the intended > > recipient or his/her representative you are not authorized to, and > > must not, read, copy, distribute, use or retain this message or any > > part of it. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be > secure or > > error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, > > destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Users mailing list > > Users(a)openser.org > > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > > >

2 1

[Serusers] message counters
by Piyush.Bansal＠relianceada.com 08 Aug '07

08 Aug '07

Hi all, Is there any way in SER thru which i can maintain the message counters (Performance Counters), i.e. counts of each and every request and response...

1 0

← Newer
1
...
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
...
29
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

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 August 2007