May 2012 - sr-users - kamailio.org

[Kamailio-Users] AudioCodes + Kamailio : Problem in SIP Message Headers
by Samuel Muller 26 Sep '12

26 Sep '12

Hello all, I recently add a classical Audiocodes Mediant 2000 with 2x 8E1, the purpose is to have several interconnections with PSTN. I configured it like this : Audiocodes registers as a gateway to the Kamailio, using a dedicated port (5062). Registration seems to be OK, and the pstn gw uses OPTIONS method to ping the proxy. I can attack the Audiocodes with a SIP phone behind Kamailio, no pbm. But the audiocodes returns some errors about SIP headers sent by Kamailio : ( sip_stack)(44732 ) AcSIPParser: Problem in SIP Message Headers [Time: 12:30:26] ( sip_stack)(44733 ) !! [ERROR] AcSIPParser: Parse Error. Unexpected symbol '0' in scheme. ALPHA expected Here you have the example of an INVITE from a SIP phone to the PSTN : ** audiocodes debug ** 4d:12h:30m:26s ( lgr_flow)(44730 ) ---- Incoming SIP Message from 77.246.81.132:5060 ---- INVITE sip:0323719001@77.246.81.136:5062;transport=udp SIP/2.0 Record-Route: <sip:77.246.81.132;lr=on;ftag=71078b346a20fb3eo0;nat=yes> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 77.246.81.132;branch=z9hG4bKdace.1ab1d59.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.0.113:5060;rport=15170;received=77.246.81.162;branch=z9hG4bK-b432f96 From: "Sam" <sip:0123451010@sip.720.fr <sip%3A0123451010(a)sip.720.fr>>;tag=71078b346a20fb3eo0 To: <sip:0323719001@sip.720.fr <sip%3A0323719001(a)sip.720.fr>> Call-ID: 944d8aec-27503ee6(a)192.168.0.113 CSeq: 102 INVITE Max-Forwards: 49 Contact: "Sam" <sip:0123451010@77.246.81.162:15170> Expires: 240 User-Agent: Linksys/SPA941-5.1.8 Content-Length: 281 Allow: ACK, BYE, CANCEL, INFO, INVITE, NOTIFY, OPTIONS, PRACK, REFER Supported: 100rel, replaces Content-Type: application/sdp P-Asserted-Identity: <0123451010> Remote-Party-ID: <0123451010>;party=caller;privacy=none;screen=yes v=0 o=- 26933860 26933860 IN IP4 192.168.0.113 s=- c=IN IP4 77.246.81.133 t=0 0 m=audio 35038 RTP/AVP 18 0 8 101 a=rtpmap:18 G729a/8000 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000 a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:101 0-15 a=ptime:30 a=sendrecv a=nortpproxy:yes ( sip_stack)(44732 ) AcSIPParser: Problem in SIP Message Headers [Time: 12:30:26] ( sip_stack)(44733 ) !! [ERROR] AcSIPParser: Parse Error. Unexpected symbol '0' in scheme. ALPHA expected ( sip_stack)(44734 ) !! [ERROR] Message type: INVITE [Time: 12:30:26] ( sip_stack)(44735 ) !! [ERROR] Source header: [Time: 12:30:26] ( sip_stack)(44736 ) !! [ERROR] Line: 17. Column: 23 [Time: 12:30:26] The outgoing INVITE from Kamailio is exactly the same received by the AudioCodes. When I searched over Google, I just found 2 answers about Asterisk / Audiocodes unsolved problem, but no more informations. I supposed that the problem is as indicated : " s=- " where source is empty in place of "NULL" / "0" or something like this ... Someone can confirm or already met the problem ? Many thanks all :) .Sam.

5 5

[Kamailio-Users] Having problems using RTPProxy to bridge internal/external networks
by Joe Hart 15 Sep '12

15 Sep '12

Hi all, For a project on which I'm currently working, I am having some problems figuring out how to correctly configure Kamailio to communicate with RTP Proxy in order to send media into and out of a network with private IP address ranges. I have a proxy set up to send the SIP traffic, and all of this is working fine. However, I'm having some trouble getting the RTP Proxy set up. Currently, when the call is connected, the offer/answer is made and RTP Proxy seems to be taking over, but I'm having trouble getting my audio to flow in both directions. Examination of the traffic coming into and out of this machine seems to indicate that the IP addresses aren't being mangled correctly. Specifically, it appears the internal IP address isn't being changed to reflect the IP address of the machine on which RTP Proxy is running, so that when the caller tries to send audio back, the IP it's given to reply to is 10.10.x.x, which obviously won't work. I have tried experimenting with specifically setting IP addresses in the rtpproxy_offer() and _answer() methods to no avail, as well as setting various flags in those methods. However, I must admit that I'm not entirely sure what's happening under the hood with these methods, or what rtpproxy is doing with that information when it gets it. Rather than continue to hack at this by trial and error, I'm hoping someone here can point me in the right direction. Any advice, example code or pep talks would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, -- Joe Hart Voice Systems Integrator Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0673

8 37

Suggestions for time utils
by Andreas Granig 16 Aug '12

16 Aug '12

Hi, I'd like to implement a couple of helper functions for time handling, e.g. checking day of week, day of month etc. from within the kamailio config file. What would you prefer, a new module ("timeutils" maybe?) or adding it to cfgutils (there are already time-based functions there like sleep and usleep)? The idea is to implement time based call-forwards, and an approach could be to provision various time-related values in usr_preferences table, and then check it in the config. For example, when doing call-forwards from Monday to Friday only, I could put this into usr_preferences: attribute: cf_weekday value: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] (each entry is a separate row in usr_preferences) And in kamailio config, I'd call this: avp_db_load(...); if(is_weekday("$avp(s:cf_weekday)")) { do CF } So is_weekday would iterate over the entries in the avp list and return true if the weekday at the time of routing matches an entry in the list. A module config param could control whether to use gmtime or localtime for matching. Does this make sense? Suggestions for other approaches? I'd rather prefer to do it directly in config instead of using some external interpreter like lua, python etc. Andreas

3 17

Kamailio Unexpectedly Terminating
by Akan 12 Jul '12

12 Jul '12

I have 2 servers running Solaris and Kamailio 3.2.3 where on one Kamailio is terminating when it tries to save the location for a register request and the other is producing a core dump when processing an Option request. I have one server handling Register request while the other sip server forwards the register requests and handles the other requests. I have included the backtraces from the core dumps and the output from the log for the registrar server as well as the command that is causing kamailio to terminate: if (!save("location")) sl_reply_error(); 4(3364) ERROR: *** cfgtrace: c=[/opt/kamailio-3.2/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=714 a=17 n=if 4(3364) ERROR: *** cfgtrace: c=[/opt/kamailio-3.2/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=711 a=26 n=save 14(3374) : <core> [pass_fd.c:293]: ERROR: receive_fd: EOF on 15 14(3374) DEBUG: <core> [tcp_main.c:3555]: DBG: handle_ser_child: dead child 4, pid 3364 (shutting down?) 14(3374) DEBUG: <core> [io_wait.h:617]: DBG: io_watch_del (1003743d8, 15, 0, 0x0) fd_no=18 called 0(3360) ALERT: <core> [main.c:751]: child process 3364 exited by a signal 10 0(3360) ALERT: <core> [main.c:754]: core was not generated 0(3360) INFO: <core> [main.c:766]: INFO: terminating due to SIGCHLD 6(3366) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 1(3361) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 2(3362) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 3(3363) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 5(3365) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 7(3367) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 8(3368) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 9(3369) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 10(3370) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 11(3371) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 12(3372) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 13(3373) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 14(3374) INFO: <core> [main.c:817]: INFO: signal 15 received 0(3360) DEBUG: presence_xml [presence_xml.c:347]: start 0(3360) ERROR: ctl [ctl.c:379]: ERROR: ctl: could not delete unix socket /tmp/kamailio_ctl: Permission denied (13) 0(3360) DEBUG: <core> [db_pool.c:102]: removing connection from the pool 0(3360) DEBUG: db_postgres [km_pg_con.c:122]: PQfinish(100842470) 0(3360) DEBUG: db_postgres [km_pg_con.c:126]: pkg_free(1004c1f30) 0(3360) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:122]: DEBUG: tm_shutdown : start 0(3360) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:125]: DEBUG: tm_shutdown : emptying hash table 0(3360) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:127]: DEBUG: tm_shutdown : removing semaphores 0(3360) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:129]: DEBUG: tm_shutdown : destroying tmcb lists 0(3360) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:132]: DEBUG: tm_shutdown : done Thanks Nathaniel

4 38

Kamailio : Listening on multiple ports behind NAT
by Reda Aouad 26 Jun '12

26 Jun '12

Hello, I am trying to implement the following configuration : - Kamailio as a SIP proxy/registrar behind a one-to-one NAT (port number is not modified) listening on ports 5060 and 53 (and more ports in the future) - aliases correctly configured : alias= udp: public_ip:53 alias= udp: public_ip:5060 alias= udp: hostname:53 alias= udp: hostname:5060 - listen directive correctly on private ip address and both ports : listen=udp:private_ip:53 listen=udp:private_ip:5060 - advertised_address=public_ip - record_route_preset("public_ip") is used to announce the public IP address in the RR header - user A : registered on port 5060 - user B : registered on port 53 Suppose user A tries to call user B. The Record-Route header in the INVITE forwarded from Kamailio to user B should contain the port number on which user B is connected (53), to force user B to send future requests to that port number. But I have no method to know which port user B is connected to, and that problem is aggravated when user B has multiple registrations on different port numbers and parralel forking is done. Declaring advertised_port doesn't solve the problem. I cannot force port number 53 in record_route_preset("public_ip:53") since it wouldn't work when user B calls user A. Using the record_route( ) function, Kamailio doesn't use the advertised_address to construct the RR header. Another problem is that the record_route_preset function clears the DID cookie set by the dialog module, which makes Kamailio fallback to SIP elements to match the request to an existing dialog, thus dialog matching becomes slower, and performance is an issue for me. Any suggestions? I know that one solution would be to run Kamailio with a public IP address and no NAT, but unfortunately it's not possible. I suggest that the function record_route( ) takes a public IP address as a parameter, still doing what it does (correct record routing and cookie addition did=xxx and loose route lr=on), but only replacing the private IP address on which Kamailio listens with a public IP address. Or that the record_route( ) function uses the advertised_address to construct the RR header. Thank you RA

4 10

Re: [SR-Users] FW: (Devel) Segmentation fault using pua_dialoginfo
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 14 Jun '12

14 Jun '12

Hello, finally had a chance to look over it. I guess it is some race, resulting in a memory space being overwritten. The 200ok for publish with ringing state is processed more or less at the time when 200ok for invite comes and dialog changes state. Can you re-compile with MEMDBG=1 (edit the Makefile.defs or give it in the command line parameter) and try again? Maybe the memory manager can catch the fault operation and provide more details. Cheers, Daniel On 5/17/12 6:58 PM, Charles Chance wrote: > > Hi Daniel, > > I have sent the messages over to you. > > I look forward to hear what you can find. > > Best, > > Charles > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:*Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com] > *Sent:* 17 May 2012 15:06 > *To:* Charles Chance > *Cc:* 'SIP Router - Kamailio (OpenSER) and SIP Express Router (SER) > -Users Mailing List' > *Subject:* Re: FW: (Devel) Segmentation fault using pua_dialoginfo > > Hello, > > the content of ps->param is pretty much all invalid. So looks like a > callback on a freed/invalid parameter, could be a double-callback > execution. > > Set debug=3 and send all the messages for such case -- it might be > quite a lot of them, so send them to my email address, the mailing > list has a limit of message size. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > On 5/17/12 2:13 PM, Charles Chance wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Requested output as follows: >> >> (gdb) frame 1 >> >> #1 publ_cback_func (t=0xb3dc8e38, type=1024, ps=0xbfcdd5d8) >> >> at send_publish.c:246 >> >> 246 hash_code= core_hash(hentity->pres_uri, NULL, HASH_SIZE); >> >> (gdb) p *ps >> >> $2 = {req = 0x0, rpl = 0xb7c30340, param = 0xb3dc3ff4, code = 412, >> flags = 0, >> >> branch = 0, t_rbuf = 0x0, dst = 0x0, send_buf = {s = 0x0, len = 0}} >> >> (gdb) p *(ua_pres_t*)(*ps->param) >> >> $3 = {id = {s = 0x20455942 <Address 0x20455942 out of bounds>, >> >> len = 980445555}, pres_uri = 0x40323531, event = 875444279, >> >> expires = 875703856, desired_expires = 858861105, flag = 808794676, >> >> db_flag = 1394618421, cb_param = 0x322f5049, next = 0xa0d302e, >> >> ua_flag = 979462486, etag = { >> >> s = 0x50495320 <Address 0x50495320 out of bounds>, len = 808333871}, >> >> tuple_id = {s = 0x5044552f <Address 0x5044552f out of bounds>, >> >> len = 775436064}, body = 0x322e3034, content_type = { >> >> s = 0x312e3134 <Address 0x312e3134 out of bounds>, len = 1648047155}, >> >> watcher_uri = 0x636e6172, call_id = { >> >> s = 0x397a3d68 <Address 0x397a3d68 out of bounds>, len = 1647593320}, >> >> to_tag = {s = 0x3435634b <Address 0x3435634b out of bounds>, >> >> len = 842149473}, from_tag = { >> >> s = 0x63306461 <Address 0x63306461 out of bounds>, len = 808334648}, >> >> cseq = 1767246349, version = 1394621025, outbound_proxy = 0x322f5049, >> >> extra_headers = 0x552f302e, record_route = { >> >> s = 0x31205044 <Address 0x31205044 out of bounds>, len = 825111097}, >> >> remote_contact = {s = 0x312e3836 <Address 0x312e3836 out of bounds>, >> >> len = 976498224}, contact = { >> >> s = 0x36373135 <Address 0x36373135 out of bounds>, len = 1701985073}} >> >> Yes, it is a test server so very happy to arrange for remote access >> if required. In the meantime, I will do a little more digging to try >> to find out why entity is null. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Charles >> > > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla -http://www.asipto.com > http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda> -http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com> > Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virus Database: 2425/5004 - Release Date: 05/16/12 > -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Advanced Training, Seattle, USA, Sep 23-26, 2012 - http://asipto.com/u/katu

1 1

Lua script calling rewriteuri
by Sharif Tanvir Rahman 14 Jun '12

14 Jun '12

Hello, We plan to use Kamailio as redirect server. Corresponding contact list is to be fetched by a Lua script from DB. The problem is about calling the required 'rewriteuri' function: 1. From lua script. both 'sr.rewriteuri()' and 'sr.modf("rewriteuri", ...)" fails to write the 'contact' field. 2. I tried an alternative way; pushing the value from lua (e.g. sr.pv.sets("contact", "sip:...")) and got the value in the Kamailio.cfg ($var(contact)). But can't call the rewriteuri function with this variable's value as argument. This seems to be a general problem of calling a function from .cfg with a variable's value as parameter. Any help much appreciated. -- Sharif

2 3

lcr from_uri not matching
by Ben WIlliams 08 Jun '12

08 Jun '12

Has anyone experienced this problem where lcr only works when from_uri is null. When I change it to .* the match fails. Thanks Ben

3 8

CFGUtils module question
by Fabian Borot 31 May '12

31 May '12

Hello Can somebody help me understand the example given with MI command "is_gflag"? ... $ kamctl fifo set_gflag 1024 $ kamctl fifo is_gflag 1024 TRUE $ kamctl fifo is_gflag 1025 TRUE $ kamctl fifo is_gflag 1023 FALSE $ kamctl fifo set_gflag 0x10 $ kamctl fifo is_gflag 1023 TRUE $ kamctl fifo is_gflag 1007 FALSE $ kamctl fifo is_gflag 16 TRUE This is how I understand it. There are 32 posible flags (0..31), each one can be set independently. The commands "is_flag" and "set_gflag" expect a bitmask as value (decimal or hex) If I set "kamctl fifo set_gflag 1024", this means "100 0000 0000", I expect that the only flag that has been set to 1 is the position 10. How come the command "kamctl fifo is_gflag 1025" which is "100 0000 0001" can yield TRUE?. I expect it to be TRUE only if flags 0 and 10 are both set to 1. Same thing with setting the flag to 0x10 (16 in decimal, "1 0000" in binary), how come the "is_gflag 1023 and is_gflag 1007" can return TRUE? tx a lot fborot

2 2

Fwd: [Solved]Creating RURI ($ru) from Contact ($ct)
by Aft nix 31 May '12

31 May '12

Hi all, I'm posting the script which worked. In future if anybody faces the same problem can get a solution out of this. In request_route: #!ifdef WITH_HASH if (is_method("INVITE") && !has_totag()){ xdbg ("Contact [$ct] with Callid [$ci]"); $sht(a=>$ci) = $ct; } #!endif in route[WITHINDLG] #!ifdef WITH_HASH xdbg ("ruri [$ru]"); if ($(sht(a=>$ci){nameaddr.uri}) != $ru){ xdbg ("hash table entry [$sht(a=>$ci)]"); $ru = $(sht(a=>$ci){nameaddr.uri}); sht_rm_name_re("ha=>$ci"); xdbg ("rewriting ruri to [$ru]"); } #!endif Thanks everyone for the help. I'm marking this thread as solved. -- -aft -- -aft

3 7