sr-users January 2008

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

131 participants
217 discussions

by Henning Westerholt

On Tuesday 22 January 2008, Ricardo Martinez wrote: > Hello. > I would like to make a question about the carrierroute module. > How does it work when one of the "level 0" gw's are down?. For example , > this is my carrierroute table : > > +----+---------+-------------+--------+------+-------+---------------+ > | id | carrier | scan_prefix | domain | prob | strip | rewrite_host | > +----+---------+-------------+--------+------+-------+---------------+ > | 1 | 1 | 49 | 0 | 0.3 | 0 | de-1.carrier1 | > | 2 | 1 | 49 | 0 | 0.3 | 0 | de-2.carrier1 | > | 3 | 1 | 49 | 0 | 0.3 | 0 | de-3.carrier1 | > | 4 | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 0 | defa.carrier1 | > +----+---------+-------------+--------+------+-------+---------------+ > > > > 1- Let's suppose "de-1.carrier1" gateway is down. So.. any INVITE to > that gateway will not have any answer (for the failure_route failover), how > the module handle this?, It tries with the others+.? Hi Ricardo, no, at the moment there is no automatically failover done from the carrierroute module. So if you want to route your calls to another gw, e.g. 'de-2', you must manual re-route it to another gw/ domain in the failure_route block. E.g. route to domain 0 in route[..], route to domain 1 in failure_route. > 2.- Now, suppose that "de-1.carrier1" gateway is only full, so i can > probably have a reply from the gateway (maybe a "480" message"), so the > carrierroute module now tries with a failover route (defa.carrier1?) or > tries with any of the other two gateways still not full? I suppose you mean that 'de-1' is overloaded. No, the next domain is not automatically entered. This deficiency is known, and will be addressed in the future. But this code is not ready yet for a release. You could use the lcr module, there exist a 'next_gw' function, if you don't want to manually specify the failure_routes. Cheers, Henning

16 years, 11 months

Re: [OpenSER-Users] Serial fork terminated after 5 call

by Sergey Babichev

Thanks, where i can read about this error (discarding fwd for a cancelled transaction) and others? > Hi Sergey, > the "discarding fwd for a cancelled transaction" error is generated when > you try to send a request for a transaction that was already cancelled > from the client side. So probably the PSTN GW cancels the call while you > still want to fork a new branch. > regards, > Bogdan > Sergey Babichev wrote: > > Problem is appear when i calling from PSTN. It's work fine when i calling from sip account to huntgroup. I think this is problem whith timer in my PSTN gateway. > > > > > > > > > >> Hi all! > >> > > > > > >> I want enable hunting for my extensions. It's work fine, but if my hunt group consists of more then 5 extensions, call terminated and I see in syslog error: > >> > > > > > >> Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: ERROR:tm:t_forward_nonack: discarding fwd for a cancelled transaction > >> > > > > > >> Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: ERROR:tm:w_t_relay: t_forward_nonack failed > >> > > > > > >> Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=5, save=0, relay=5 > >> > > > > > >> What is problem may be? > >> > > > > > >> -- > >> > > > > > >> Best regards, > >> > > > > > >> Sergey Babichev > >> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >> Users mailing list > >> > > > > > >> Users(a)lists.openser.org > >> > > > > > >> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > > > Sergey Babichev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Users mailing list > > Users(a)lists.openser.org > > http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > > > -- Best regards, Sergey Babichev

16 years, 11 months

[OpenSER-Users] SCTP enabled stack

by J Bhanot

Hi, I am trying to build the stack with SCTP enabled... I am doing following SCTP=1 make all but I am getting error - In file included from forward.h:49, from action.c:49: sctp_server.h:32:26: error: netinet/sctp.h: No such file or directory make: *** [action.o] Error 1 I am using FC8 - have inserted the SCTP module using /sbin/modprobe sctp without any error.. To overcome this error.... I chaged the absolute path of sctp.h in sctp_server.h to #include "/usr/src/kernels/2.6.23.1-42.fc8-i686/include/net/sctp/sctp.h"*/ instead of #include <netinet/sctp.h> but even then i am getting many erros of redeclration of many variables and files not being found in sctp.h Kindly suggest what should be done so that server can work with SCTP. Thanks, jb __________________________________________ =====-----=====-----===== Notice: The information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and immediately and permanently delete the message and any attachments. Thank you

16 years, 11 months

[OpenSER-Users] register two AOR

by Victor Gamov

Hi gentlemens! Is it possible to set modparam("registrar", "aor_avp", "$avp(s:sip-aor)") and call save("location") to save AOR from $avp(s:sip-aor) If not, how I can register two AOR when REGISTER message processed? -- CU, Victor Gamov

16 years, 11 months

[OpenSER-Users] Launch of Soap-Simple-Proxy version 1.0.2

by Adrian Georgescu

Hello, This software exposes a simple to use SOAP interface for the OpenXCAP server available at http://openxcap.org It is a transparent proxy for SOAP to XCAP requests relying on XCAP server for authenticating requests. Applications ------------ You may use the provided functions to: 1. Publish presence information (using pidf-manipulation application) 2. Set the presence policy for a given presentity (pres-rules application) 3. Retrieve the OpenSER watchers for a given presentity (watchers application) The software can be used as: - Stand-alone data publisher for persistent Presence documents. - Policy manager. You can build a web interface to manage the pres-rules documetn and use it in combination with Eyebeam-lite as a complete SIP SIMPLE client. - To retreive and display the active watchers from OpenSER in a web interface. Usage ----- To use the software you must use a SOAP client. First you must generate the client library from the supplied WSDL file using the SOAP tools available in your programming language. The SOAP functions usage and syntax are self explanatory. Available functions are described in the wsdl/ssp.wsdl file. An example of PHP client library is provided with CDRTool version 6 or higher, the soap client functions are available in the file: /var/www/CDRTool/provisioning/ngnpro_soap_library.phtml in the class WebService_SoapSIMPLEProxy_PresencePort Support ------- The support is provided by AG Projects on a best effort basis. Report problems via the ticketing system from openxcap.org or openser users mailing lists. License ------- Soap-Simple-Proxy is licensed under GNU PUBLIC LICENSE version 2.0. The software can be downloaded from: http://openxcap.org Kind regards, Adrian Georgescu

16 years, 11 months

[OpenSER-Users] New OpenXCAP release 0.9.9

by Adrian Georgescu

Hello, There is a new OpenXCAP release available. Changes in version 0.9.9 ------------------------ * Fixed node selector decoding * Save presence rules documents under the same file name ("index.xml") * Moved trusted_peers to [Authentication] config section * Default xcap_table to "xcap" in config.ini.sample * Improved URI logging * DELETE of a full document doesn't produce an Etag in the 200 response * Added SIP Thor backend Changes in version 0.9.8 ------------------------ * Support subdirectories by using doc_uri column in xcap table * Updated MySQL xcap table structure The software can be downloaded from: http://openxcap.org Kind regards, Adrian Georgescu

16 years, 11 months

[Serusers] SER service: registration problem (load balancing quirk?)

by Tom van der Geer

Dear SER users, I'm experiencing occasional problems with my SIP clients registration to the (free) iptel.org SER service. I'm not sure if this is the place to ask questions regarding this service. If not, please give me a pointer who/what I should contact. I've made 2 tcpdumps. 1 from a failing registration request and from a successful registration request. The setup for both situations is the same. These captures were made within 40 minutes from each other. In both cases the first registration attempt is replied with a 401 Unauthorized (obviously) which request for authentication. In both cases my SIP client (SJPhone) replies correctly (I assume) with a new registration and the requested account credentials. In the case of a successful registration the SER replies with a 200 OK. In the case of a failing registration my SIP client receives another 401 Unauthorized message. What struck me is that this second 401 is sent from another SER system. (The "Server:" header from the first registration attempt is different from the second registration attempt.) The first header has "Server: Sip EXpress router (2.1.0-dev16-tcp (i386/linux))" while the second 401 has "Server: Sip EXpress router (2.0.0-rc5 (i386/linux))". (note the difference in SER versions) I've verified that in the case of a successful registration the Server header in the first (401) and second (200) response are the same: "Server: Sip EXpress router (2.1.0-dev16-tcp (i386/linux))" Is this some kind of weird load balancing quirk? From a security point of view I don't want to send my TCP Dumps (with my authentication) to the mailing list, but I can send it to a personal email address when required. Thanks, Tom

16 years, 11 months

Re: [OpenSER-Users] Serial fork terminated after 5 call

by Sergey Babichev

Problem is appear when i calling from PSTN. It's work fine when i calling from sip account to huntgroup. I think this is problem whith timer in my PSTN gateway. > Hi all! > I want enable hunting for my extensions. It's work fine, but if my hunt group consists of more then 5 extensions, call terminated and I see in syslog error: > Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: ERROR:tm:t_forward_nonack: discarding fwd for a cancelled transaction > Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: ERROR:tm:w_t_relay: t_forward_nonack failed > Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=5, save=0, relay=5 > What is problem may be? > -- > Best regards, > Sergey Babichev > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users(a)lists.openser.org > http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users -- Best regards, Sergey Babichev

16 years, 11 months

[OpenSER-Users] Serial fork terminated after 5 call

by Sergey Babichev

Hi all! I want enable hunting for my extensions. It's work fine, but if my hunt group consists of more then 5 extensions, call terminated and I see in syslog error: Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: ERROR:tm:t_forward_nonack: discarding fwd for a cancelled transaction Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: ERROR:tm:w_t_relay: t_forward_nonack failed Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=5, save=0, relay=5 What is problem may be? -- Best regards, Sergey Babichev

16 years, 11 months

[OpenSER-Users] Why RPID related functions instead of PAI?

by Iñaki Baz Castillo

Hi, "Remote-Party-ID" is a draft ("draft-ietf-sip-privacy-04") [1] expired in 2002 while "P-Asserted-Identity" is a official RFC (3325) [2]. I'd like to know why OpenSer manages RPID in some functions ("auth" module) instead of PAI. I assume that some gateways just implement RPID and so, but can't understand why PAI is ignored (the use of PAI is extended in gateways). As a curiosity, both draft and RFC have really **common** parts, as chapter "Introduction" (4 in draft, 3 in RFC): "3/4 Introduction Various providers offering a telephony service over IP networks have selected SIP as a call establishment protocol. Their environments require a way for trusted network elements operated by the service providers (for example SIP proxy servers) to communicate the identity of the subscribers to such a service, yet also need to withhold this information from entities that are not trusted when necessary. Such networks typically assume some level of transitive trust amongst providers and the devices they operate. These networks need to support certain traditional telephony services and meet basic regulatory and public safety requirements. These include Calling Identity Delivery services, Calling Identity Delivery Blocking, and the ability to trace the originator of a call ... " So my question is again:why OpenSer supports RPID related functions and not PAI functions? Thanks for any explanation. [1] RPID: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sip-privacy-04 [2] PAI: http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3325.html -- Iñaki Baz Castillo

16 years, 11 months

← Newer
1
...
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
...
22
Older →

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 January 2008