it was brought into discussions several times in the past about core
functions not accepting variables in the parameters. I think it is time
to update them during the 5.3 release development. For few of them, I
added in the past some alternative function in the corex module (e.g.,
force_send_socket() in core and set_send_socket() in corex module).
So, I see two options:
1) add a function with similar name in corex module and same behaviour
like the one from core
2) remove the function export from the core and export one with the same
name from the corex module
First one will ensure that configs using the functions right now keep
working without any update.
The second one will be better in long term from the point of
documentation (no duplicated docs), but there might be few cases that
would require updates in the config -- iirc, there are some functions
that can get special tokens in the parameters (like forward(uri:host,
uri:port)), they will get an equivalent with variables, but old config
will not be compatible.
Obviously the reason for this email is to ask the developers and users
what would be the preferred way from own point of view.
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio World Conference - May 6-8, 2019 -- www.kamailioworld.com
Kamailio Advanced Training - Mar 4-6, 2019 in Berlin; Mar 25-27, 2019, in Washington, DC, USA -- www.asipto.com
is there a way to pass $avp values to t_relay function. i tried ;
0(75155) ERROR: tm [tm.c:2456]: fixup_t_relay_to(): fixing ($avp(dd), 1)
0(75155) ERROR: tm [tm.c:2459]: fixup_t_relay_to(): param type 8
0(75155) ERROR: tm [tm.c:2456]: fixup_t_relay_to(): fixing ($avp(flags), 2)
0(75155) ERROR: tm [tm.c:2459]: fixup_t_relay_to(): param type 11
0(75155) CRITICAL: tm [tm.c:2549]: fixup_t_relay_to(): invalid flags <$avp(flags)>
0(75155) ERROR: <core> [core/route.c:1154]: fix_actions(): fixing failed (code=-1) at cfg:/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg:489
0(75155) ERROR: <core> [core/rvalue.c:3860]: fix_rval_expr(): failure in cfg at line: 489 col: 42
0(75155) ERROR: <core> [core/route.c:1154]: fix_actions(): fixing failed (code=-1) at cfg:/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg:494
0(75155) ERROR: <core> [core/route.c:1154]: fix_actions(): fixing failed (code=-1) at cfg:/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg:495
in addition i have a look code , in fixup functions try to resolve host values so parameteres cannot find $avp .
in conclusion , does kamailio need new function to pass $avp value? Can i try to code?
I'm trying to test kazoo module but unfortunately it is not loading:
*0(25107) ERROR: <core> [core/sr_module.c:498]: load_module(): could not
open module </usr/lib64/kamailio/modules/kazoo.so>:
/usr/lib64/kamailio/modules/kazoo.so: undefined symbol: event_set*
It was built today together with other modules and Kamailio itself today
from branch 5.2 on CentOS 6. librabbitmq version is 0.5.2-1.
Does anyone has it running and if so what version is it?
Thanks a lot!
I have a question regarding kamailio database, I see when kamailio is
stopped, usrloc -> location and imc -> imc_rooms module tables shows some
information. but when kamailio is running it's not.
is it possible to manually insert to these tables, I don't want to use IMC
commands like #join #accept ...
is it possible to access location table and see which users are registered
when kamailio is running?
Is it possible to redirect only the audio stream towards Asterisk from Kamailio (Proxy) via RTPEngine and not to send the video stream to Asterisk. I am yet to get the complete reason why my client wants this to happen though.
Reading and understanding is a skill in it self.. Learned a bit more of that this morning.
To be able to use the dmq_ursloc, just use:
So, I have registrar replication working, on with reading to get the rest working.
Im trying to setup registration replication with the use of the dmq and dmq_usrlog modules.
I have configured two servers, configured kamailio on both.
When I register a sip client on the one I get a nice KDMQ message on the second server, but the second server reacts with a 404 not found:
U 2018/12/17 05:08:38.974495 10.10.0.1:6000 -> 10.10.0.2:6000 #3
KDMQ sip:email@example.com:6000 SIP/2.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.0.1:6000;branch=z9hG4bK00ed.e1666b85000000000000000000000000.0.
CSeq: 10 KDMQ.
User-Agent: kamailio (5.1.6 (x86_64/linux)).
U 2018/12/17 05:08:38.979062 10.10.0.2:6000 -> 10.10.0.1:6000 #4
SIP/2.0 404 Not Found.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.0.1:6000;branch=z9hG4bK00ed.e1666b85000000000000000000000000.0;rport=6000.
CSeq: 10 KDMQ.
Server: kamailio (5.1.6 (x86_64/linux)).
I think I have to configure a bit more than just the parameters of the dmq and dqm_usrloc modules.
Ive googled, looked in the Sip routing with kamailio book, but no luck.
Did not see any examples in the kamailio source, with regards to the dmq_usrloc module.
I am not looking for direct answers, have not provided you with enough information for that, but I would appreciate information on how to correctly configure registration replication using the dmq/dmq_usrloc module...
I see that still a lot of emails are sent directly to me after a
discussion started on public mailing lists (subject with mailing lists
prefix, but the sender header is not the mailing list daemon), I would
like to remind that, at least in my case, writing emails directly
without cc-ing the mailing list is highly not recommended and there
is practically 0 chance to get an answer from myself. The rule is
also suggested in the mailing lists presentation page:
Unless I asked explicitly for a private email with some specific
details, the message will not be noticed in decent time and therefore
not replied. I use this email address for many public mailing lists and
it is intended only for that usage, I am reacting based on the filters I
created, unmatched messages getting the lowest priority.
Therefore if you wrote me and expect a response, re-send the message to
the appropriate public mailing list. Checking and answering the messages
on Kamailio mailing lists are among the top of priorities on my daily
activity, so it is high chance you get the response faster when you
write there. Note that you can always mask sensitive data (e.g., replace
passwords, IP addresses) before sending logs or config file.
There are several common sense as well as technical reasons for keeping
the discussion on public mailing lists. Here are some along with other
suggestions to improve the likeliness of getting an answer:
- we are not answering questions on mailing lists to help only one
person, but also other people that may have similar issues in the future
-- they can find the answers in the archive with a search engine. Also,
other people subscribed to the list can learn from conversation or
contribute to the discussion, resulting in better outcome
- the amount of unexpected messages is very high -- it is practically a
zero chance to get to the folder with messages that didn't match any
filter (thus your message is not going to be replied)
- whenever I find time, the first emails I answer are those coming on
mailing lists. They are many there as well, people are traveling or
having other personal or business projects, so sometime is good to send
a reminder if a question does not get an answer
- starting with negative approach or no technical content, like you are
going to use something else if you don't get a reply instantly, or this
application is missing what so ever tutorial giving exactly the solution
you need, or simply asking for full config of complex requirements, is
not helping at all, but actually making people to ignore your messages.
Start with what you tried and where you got stuck. Everything you get is
for free, have appropriate expectation and behavior.
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
May be this has been asked before but I was not able to find an answer.
I setup IMS with 3 instances of kamailio: P-CSCF, I-CSCF and S-CSCF (I
got the config files from here
I would like to register two clients to the IMS and make a VoLTE like call.
So I want to setup my P-CSCF to send SIP messages to my I-CSCF without
Rx interface (without using PCRF).
I'm not able to find how to tell P-CSCF where to direct the sip traffic.
It obviously should happen in route[REGISTER].
Right now P-CSCF sends all REGISTER requests to itself and goes to a loop.