sr-users April 2009

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

83 participants
110 discussions

[Kamailio-Users] insert_hf not persistant
by David Aldworth 29 Apr '09

29 Apr '09

The issue we are having is where Kamailio relays an INVITE with the correct To header field domain, however when it relays the subsequent CANCEL it seems like it does not correctly change the To header field domain. Here is what we use to try and put in the correct To header in the CANCEL: remove_hf("To"); if ($tt == null) insert_hf("To: <sip:$rU@1.2.3.4>\r\n", "From"); else insert_hf("To: <sip:$rU@1.2.3.4>;tag=$tt\r\n", "From"); xlog("DBG1: Trying to fix CANCEL: td=$td ci=$ci rm= $rm ru=$ru ou=$ou\n"); Changes to the left side of the at-symbol persist, however changes to the domain are reverted and changed back to what was received from adjacent proxy. Any ideas why it reverts?

1 0

[Kamailio-Users] Amoocon 2009
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 29 Apr '09

29 Apr '09

Amoocon (former AsteriskTag) 2009 will take place in Rostock, Germany, May 04-05, 2009. Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP-Router.org projects will be presented at the event by talks and case studies of: * Daniel-Constatin Mierla: http://www.amoocon.de/users/14 * Olle E. Johansson: http://www.amoocon.de/users/61 If you are around Berlin the days before the event or in Rostock during the event and want to meet, drop me an email. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com/

1 0

[Serusers] SER proxy compatibility with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5
by inge 28 Apr '09

28 Apr '09

Hi, I want to buy a RHEL5 to install a SER Proxy 0.9.6. I want to know if this version is compatible whith the RHEL 5. Thanks.

2 1

[Kamailio-Users] sharing vedio between sip (x-lite) and MSN
by rachid 28 Apr '09

28 Apr '09

Hello all, I instaled kamailio and i want to have sharing video between a sip user (X-lite) and MSN user someone can help me please? -- ------------------------------------------------------------ BAHA Rachid Elève ingénieur en 3ème année à l'INPT, Rabat GSM:(+33) 0619787609

4 3

Re: [Kamailio-Users] Load Balancing Asterisk using Kamailio
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 27 Apr '09

27 Apr '09

Hello, not cc-ing to mailing list could lead to no answer... private messages from mailing list threads are ignored. Other benefits with mailing lists is that others can answer quicker or better. Thanks, Daniel On 04/27/2009 04:52 PM, Kurt Weasel wrote: > Hi Daniel, thank you for the reply. > I have some more questions to ask. > > 1. Since the dial plan is configured exactly on Asterisk (at > etc/asterisk/sip.conf and /etc/asterisk/extension.conf), do we need to > enable MySQL for Kamailio installation? Or the default installation > configuration will do (without additional dialplan or MySQL setting)? > My idea is only using Kamailio as pure load balancer so we hope to do > this as simple as possible without degrading the function. > > 2. I assume using Kamailio dispatcher module will forward some of the > users to asterik server 1 and some of them to asterisk server 2. Then > if user A is registered with Asterisk server 1 and user B is > registered with Asterisk server 2, can user A call user B? Without > Kamailio, the answer is no since they are in different Asterisk > server. With Kamailio, I am expecting both user A and B can call each > other although they are registered with different servers. Is my > configuration enough to achieve this function? Or do we need some > additional setup for this? > > Thanks again. > > Best Regards, > Kurt > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla > <miconda(a)gmail.com <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hello, > > > On 04/27/2009 07:10 AM, Kurt Weasel wrote: > > Hi, > > I searched around the web to load balance asterisk servers and > found Kamailio for possible solution. Let's say I have two > identical asterisk servers with same dialplan and > configuration and I want both servers look like they have same > IP address from clients. Based on my understanding, we need 1 > Kamailio as load balancer and 2 Asterisk servers as the real > servers. Let's say the setup is : > > Kamailio load balancer 192.168.2.1 > Asterisk Server #1 192.168.2.2 > Asterisk Server #2 192.168.2.3 > > My question is, X-Lite softphone Configuration should be set > to domain 192.168.2.1, right? > > I also want to know the step by step configuration to set > kamailio as load balancer. I have not used Kamailio before. > However after searching the documentation, the step (based on > my understanding) is somewhat like this : > > 1. Install Kamailio. I will use the step by step here : > http://kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/install:kamailio-1.5.x-from-svn > > 2. Then, using dipatcher module, I will configure it using > this guide here : > http://kamailio.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/asterisk:load-balancing-and-ha > Then modify the dispatcher.list file to match the IP address > of my asterisk servers : > > /1 sip:192.168.2.2:5060 <http://192.168.2.2:5060> > <http://192.168.2.2:5060> > 1 sip:192.168.2.3:5060 <http://192.168.2.3:5060> > <http://192.168.2.3:5060>/ > > > Am I missing some steps? > Do I also need to configure dialplan or any other file at > Kamailio load balancer? Or those two steps basically done it > all for simple load balancing configuration? Thanks for your > responses. > > these steps are ok if you do not deal with NAT. If yes, then > things get a bit more complex, you need PATH support on load > balancer, but AFAIK, Asterisk does not support it -- maybe I am wrong. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla > http://www.asipto.com/ > > -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com/

1 0

[Kamailio-Users] LCR gateway failthrough..
by Nick Warr 27 Apr '09

27 Apr '09

I'm using the LCR module to send traffic based on just the prefix of the number at the moment. I have two gateway groups, one with a local provider to connect locally, one with a larger one to do international calls (they can also connect locally but with a higher price).. When I call next_gw() will LCR use all possible gateway groups, or just the gateway(s) in the first matching group? The second question is tangential to the first, if it does send the traffic to other gateway group after failing through the first, does it regenerate the RURI, because the local provider wants a numerical prefix on the calls I send, and the other one no (basically do I need to account for this in my config?)

4 6

[Serusers] SER with RADIUS
by Leon Li 27 Apr '09

27 Apr '09

Hi, Does anyone still have the instruction of SER RADIUS Howto? The link http://iptel.org/ser/ser_radius.html Found in an old thread doesn't work now. (see below for the old thread) [Serusers] ser RADIUS Howto Jan Janak jan at iptel.org <mailto:serusers%40lists.iptel.org?Subject=%5BSerusers%5D%20ser%20RADIUS %20Howto&In-Reply-To=> Fri Sep 12 02:11:33 UTC 2003 * Previous message: [Serusers] serweb main page display <http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2003-September/002595.html> * Next message: [Serusers] Implementing Voicemail <http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2003-September/002596.html> * Messages sorted by: [ date ] <http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2003-September/date.html#2591 > [ thread ] <http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2003-September/thread.html#25 91> [ subject ] <http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2003-September/subject.html#2 591> [ author ] <http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2003-September/author.html#25 91> ________________________________ Hello, I finished SER RADIUS Howto. The document thoroughly describes installation and configuration of RADIUS server and client libraries for authentication and accounting with ser. RADIUS related questions appear quite often on the mailing lists so I hope the document helps. I would appreciate if anyone using another RADIUS server than FreeRADIUS could describe the setup and send it to me (plaintext is OK, I will convert it to docbook). You can get the document from here: http://iptel.org/ser/ser_radius.html Any feedback is appreciated. Jan. Thanks Leon

1 0

[Kamailio-Users] switch to TCP when UDP message is bigger than MTU
by Sandro Bordacchini 26 Apr '09

26 Apr '09

Hi all. I am doing some test about tcp/udp transport protocols in SIP and IP fragmentation. I would like to test this behaviour, as stated in par. 18.1.1 of rfc3261: If a request is within 200 bytes of the path MTU, or if it is larger than 1300 bytes and the path MTU is unknown, the request MUST be sent using an RFC 2914 [43] congestion controlled transport protocol, such as TCP. If this causes a change in the transport protocol from the one indicated in the top Via, the value in the top Via MUST be changed. This prevents fragmentation of messages over UDP and provides congestion control for larger messages. However, implementations MUST be able to handle messages up to the maximum datagram packet size. To do this, I am running a OpenSer 1.3.2 with a "default" configuration (and very simple: no accounting, no auth, no DB) and I have two SIP phones registered on that server (for example, ext. 100 and ext. 101). When 100 calls 101, the INVITE reaches the OpenSer that appends some "dummy" headers (I have added some append_hf in the route), just to let the message be bigger than the MTU. The INVITE is routed towards 101 with UDP protocol and I have IP fragmentation. Do you have some hint to get the OpenSer work as described in the RFC (i.e. switch automatically to TCP)? Or is this only possible with UACs and not with proxies? TIA -- Ing. Sandro Bordacchini Dexgate Sr. Tech. Engineer P.zza Fermi 1 - Fornacette IT-56012 Calcinaia (Pisa) Tel. +390587424145 ext 580

6 8

[Serusers] Error in CANCEL generation while forking - ser 2.0
by Tomasz Zieleniewski 24 Apr '09

24 Apr '09

Hi, I found an error in the SER proxy behavior. I use SER v_2_0_0 from CVS. When SER forks requests because there is a number of registered users for particular AOR, and then receives first final response, it in the standard way cancels all other transaction. Problems is that it is not compliant with RFC3261 because it doesn't add Max-Forwards header to the CANCEL requests. RFC3261 says that Max-Forwards must be present in any SIP method. CANCEL sip:16@212.180.179.42:9360 SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 212.180.179.42:7060;branch=z9hG4bKb721.ceeb7aa5.1 From: <sip:pgr@sip.rd.touk.pl <sip%3Apgr(a)sip.rd.touk.pl>>;tag=374595 Call-ID: 0da793c0ff2e7f2fc81b23e4166bbab3(a)212.180.179.42 To: <sip:tzl@sip.rd.touk.pl <sip%3Atzl(a)sip.rd.touk.pl>> CSeq: 479638 CANCEL Route: <sip:sip.rd.touk.pl:7060;lr> User-Agent: Sip EXpress router(2.0.0 (x86_64/linux)) Content-Length: 0 Kind regards, Tomasz Zieleniewski

1 0

[Kamailio-Users] textops usage
by Juan Perez 24 Apr '09

24 Apr '09

Hello I am receiving the SDP from a provider with this format: g729/8000/1, which I interpret as codec g729, sampling rate 8000 and the number of channels is 1. The calling party [linksys pa2p] apparently does not like the "1" and terminates the call. I want to strip it using textops module and pass back the SDP w/o the "1" and do this in the On_Reply and the Route sections: if (search_body("g729/8000/1")) { xlog("L_INFO","mylog: On Reply 1 section. Found the string.\n"); replace_body("g729/8000/1","g729/8000"); } but it can not even find it. Is leaving me with several questions: 1- is the "re" that I am using right? 2- Do I have to escape the "/"? 3- does the replace and search function go "deep" enough in the SDP? cheers jp

3 5

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 April 2009