sr-users April 2018

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

81 participants
104 discussions

Start a nNew thread

Re: [SR-Users] Reply Destination
by Duarte Rocha 11 Apr '18

11 Apr '18

It works. Thanks a lot!!

1 0

Reply Destination
by Duarte Rocha 11 Apr '18

11 Apr '18

Hey Is there any variable that retrieves me the destination of a reply? I've used the To header for the domain, but i can't seem to get the destination port. Any help ? Thanks

2 1

Need installation steps for installing kamailio 5.1.2 with debian packages
by vinay kumar 11 Apr '18

11 Apr '18

Hi All, can anyone share me the installtion steps for kamailio 5.1.2 with debian packages on ubuntu. i have used kamailio 4.3.6 with polaris configuration. I want to upgrade latest version of kamailio. And i have installed latest debian packages and i have used polaris scripts to bringup kamailio and its failing with status kamailio service with Result resources. if i use latest debian packages , are polaris configurations are compatible with latest packages?? Please help me out. Thanks in advance. Regards, vinay

1 0

rtpengine
by volga629＠networklab.ca 11 Apr '18

11 Apr '18

Hello Everyone, What flags available on latest rtpegnine to acomplish transcoding and codec manipulation ? Slava.

2 7

ims_dialog default_timeout parameter
by tyd 11 Apr '18

11 Apr '18

Dear all, What's the meaning of ims_dialog default_timeout parameter ? *Default value is 「43200 (12 hours)」* When modparam("ims_dialog", "default_timeout", 600) was set, the situation of Kamailio S-CSCF out of memory was solved and is running smoothly. Debian 8 with Kamailio 4.4.7

2 8

no corresponding socket found for
by Kjeld Flarup 10 Apr '18

10 Apr '18

Hi I have a setup with three kamailio's in the same host but on different ports. client ->5069 -> 5070 -> 5071 -> SIP provider Now I get this error from the 5069 Kamailio when it is routing a 200 Ok to the client: Apr 9 21:54:10 kfcpbx /usr/sbin/kamailio[9688]: ERROR: <core> [forward.c:181]: get_out_socket(): no socket found Apr 9 21:54:10 kfcpbx /usr/sbin/kamailio[9688]: ERROR: <core> [forward.c:183]: get_out_socket(): no corresponding socket found for(udp:192.168.2.101:10120) Apr 9 21:54:10 kfcpbx /usr/sbin/kamailio[9688]: ERROR: <core> [forward.c:808]: do_forward_reply(): cannot forward reply By manipulating the database I can skip the 5070 Kamailio, and then it works. I captured these two 200 Ok packets to the 5069 kamailio *Failing:* No. Time Source Destination Protocol Length Info 4713 21:54:12.814245 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 SIP/SDP 2297 Status: 200 OK | Frame 4713: 2297 bytes on wire (18376 bits), 2297 bytes captured (18376 bits) Linux cooked capture Internet Protocol Version 4, Src: 127.0.0.1, Dst: 127.0.0.1 User Datagram Protocol, Src Port: 5070, Dst Port: 5069 Session Initiation Protocol (200) Status-Line: SIP/2.0 200 OK Message Header Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.0.0.1:5069;rport=5069;branch=z9hG4bK6ef1.0c009dcf5b4965c5d1a13d508e0b31c5.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.2.101:10120;received=192.168.2.101;rport=10120;branch=z9hG4bKPjIq.uY6jYbHkIqCo03bYLsTzccb7oy9jw Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMngm271wI73zx7gmx0CmHdDZWd-w*> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMngm271wI73zx7gmx0Cq.7Cc-039Sz4Rxz5kezbQWOtUMn-9yTjcWODXoTC9BzK**> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMngmS0-R4LCz2LtZ-Lg02L-JoLNQGn3057t0SntZ5LNL2QD7Vz12-sjkSTtMxTiB.7Cc-0399LtUqzgSGnCQx0gQ56gLG6g0wn5UILt2NziWIO3ooTDcHdDZ*> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMngm271wI73zx7gmx0Nm.7Cc5039Sz4Rxz5kezbQWOtUMn-9yTjcWODXoTC9BzK**> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMngm271wI7CJx0gZx73Q.7Cc50C9I0goedg9Bzgoedg94OiRbvEynTR7EFm0wFSOZQCOsOiGQs3EIzyUMTi7jnD7qzmWjn-UVT3SwTiJx7NLo0Q**> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1:5071;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=YNdSUHC8KGHA7ZtlPh5rrTpdcW8sdpOW;did=8de.7651> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1:5070;lr=on;ftag=YNdSUHC8KGHA7ZtlPh5rrTpdcW8sdpOW;did=8de.01b2> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1:5069;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=YNdSUHC8KGHA7ZtlPh5rrTpdcW8sdpOW;vsf=AAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIMDE-;did=8de.d821> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.2.9:5069;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=YNdSUHC8KGHA7ZtlPh5rrTpdcW8sdpOW;vsf=AAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIMDE-;did=8de.d821> From: "Door" <sip:u1@192.168.2.101>;tag=YNdSUHC8KGHA7ZtlPh5rrTpdcW8sdpOW To: <sip:004540294149@scantron.viptel.dk:5070>;tag=1865008112 Call-ID: ou8V0cLHn.P7Oca-pgsnMmrWO43kIQX8 CSeq: 5778 INVITE Contact: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMnrBS7CQM0gqS0CQ2Q3m27FwI73qx0CQo6gJSngJM7gcHODXPdb7Md5XSvjEqzc**> Allow: INVITE,ACK,PRACK,SUBSCRIBE,BYE,CANCEL,NOTIFY,INFO,REFER,UPDATE P-AS-Response: 40294149 Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: 499 Message Body *OK (Without 5070)* No. Time Source Destination Protocol Length Info 373 21:44:42.955075 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 SIP/SDP 2199 Status: 200 OK | Frame 373: 2199 bytes on wire (17592 bits), 2199 bytes captured (17592 bits) Linux cooked capture Internet Protocol Version 4, Src: 127.0.0.1, Dst: 127.0.0.1 User Datagram Protocol, Src Port: 5071, Dst Port: 5069 Session Initiation Protocol (200) Status-Line: SIP/2.0 200 OK Message Header Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 127.0.0.1:5069;rport=5069;branch=z9hG4bKeea.431611add9dee6ae89135983a85d3021.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.2.101:10120;received=192.168.2.101;rport=10120;branch=z9hG4bKPjXjzYAzDU-AJ9ug6mWhSQVI4gwRomuejk Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMngm271wI73zx7gmx0CmHdDZWd-w*> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMngm271wI73zx7gmx0Cq.7Cc-039Sz4Rxz5kezbQWOtUMn-9yTjcWODXoTC9BzK**> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMn4LSntRr0NzI7NQ574XqnC0M7gQ50NJNL4EgTCQ-7imIQD7Vz12-sjkSTtMxTiB.7Cc-0399LtUqzgSGnCQx0gQ56gLG6g0wn5UILt2NziWIO3ooTDcHdDZ*> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMngm271wI73zx7gmx0Nm.7Cc5039Sz4Rxz5kezbQWOtUMn-9yTjcWODXoTC9BzK**> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMngm271wI7CJx0gZx73Q.7Cc50C9I0goedg9Bzgoedg94OiRbvj7pJJTBsJyFttWTd-XVsSuS75k3EqOEsCOZF3k6YiyQn-UVT3oyLCQx73Z-> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1:5071;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=sJQFliIRYoYobikO47pCVGUi7HH0KxiP;did=ea4.426> Record-Route: <sip:127.0.0.1:5069;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=sJQFliIRYoYobikO47pCVGUi7HH0KxiP;vsf=AAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIMDE-;did=ea4.7dd2> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.2.9:5069;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=sJQFliIRYoYobikO47pCVGUi7HH0KxiP;vsf=AAAAAAABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIMDE-;did=ea4.7dd2> From: "Door" <sip:u1@192.168.2.101>;tag=sJQFliIRYoYobikO47pCVGUi7HH0KxiP To: <sip:004540294149@scantron.viptel.dk:5070>;tag=1402236088 Call-ID: 31a27HAVA7aFhLaX9uZkBxHu31OEZqOz CSeq: 9542 INVITE Contact: <sip:127.0.0.8;line=sr-z-yMnrBS7CQM0gqS0CQ2Q3m27FwI73qx0CQo6gJSngJM7gcHODXPdb7Md5XSvjEqzc**> Allow: INVITE,ACK,PRACK,SUBSCRIBE,BYE,CANCEL,NOTIFY,INFO,REFER,UPDATE P-AS-Response: 40294149 Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: 500 Message Body Somehow it must be the contents in the 200 Ok package, but I really cant se any significant difference. Anybody knows what that message is caused by? -- -------------------- Med Liberalistiske Hilsner ---------------------- Civilingeniør, Kjeld Flarup - Mit sind er mere åbent end min tegnebog Sofienlundvej 6B, 7560 Hjerm, Tlf: 40 29 41 49 Den ikke akademiske hjemmeside for liberalismen - www.liberalismen.dk

2 4

rtpengine no voice when working between DTLS-SRTP endpoints
by Aqs Younas 10 Apr '18

10 Apr '18

Greetings list, I am trying to make two endpoints talking on DTLS-SRTP. But I hear on audio. Things work perfectly fine if I use RTP or SRTP with TLS. Endpoints are pjsip based application not webrtc based clients. Below are logs from rtpengine. I hope someone could point out amiss. Apr 9 20:02:43 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58438]: INFO: [66d2da58-21fe-48bd-9999-a1f3a22afa6d]: --------- Port 209.182.216.71:8176 <> 72.214.35.171:63577, SSRC 1234c6eb, 641 p, 110252 b, 0 e, 60 ts Apr 9 20:02:43 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58438]: INFO: [66d2da58-21fe-48bd-9999-a1f3a22afa6d]: --------- Port 209.182.216.71:8177 <> 72.214.35.171:63056 (RTCP), SSRC 1234c6eb, 4 p, 372 b, 0 e, 60 ts Apr 9 20:12:24 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58438]: INFO: Version git-master-3ef300b shutting down Apr 9 20:12:37 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58958]: INFO: Generating new DTLS certificate Apr 9 20:12:37 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: Startup complete, version git-master-3ef300b Apr 9 20:13:43 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08]: Received command 'offer' from 127.0.0.1:57645 Apr 9 20:13:43 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: NOTICE: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08]: Creating new call Apr 9 20:13:43 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08]: offer time = 0.002612 sec Apr 9 20:13:43 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08]: Replying to 'offer' from 127.0.0.1:57645 Apr 9 20:13:56 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08]: Received command 'answer' from 127.0.0.1:42309 Apr 9 20:13:56 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08]: answer time = 0.000220 sec Apr 9 20:13:56 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08]: Replying to 'answer' from 127.0.0.1:42309 Apr 9 20:13:56 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08 port 8000]: DTLS: Peer certificate accepted Apr 9 20:13:56 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08 port 8000]: DTLS-SRTP successfully negotiated Apr 9 20:13:57 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: ERR: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08 port 8000]: SRTP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated Apr 9 20:14:00 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08 port 8000]: Confirmed peer address as 72.214.35.171:58634 Apr 9 20:14:07 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: ERR: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08 port 8001]: SRTCP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated Apr 9 20:14:07 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08] version=2, padding=0, count=1, payloadtype=200, length=12, ssrc=2045607967, ntp_sec=1379282714, ntp_fractions=439054259, rtp_ts=1838072137, sender_packets=3366262813, sender_bytes=2383498210, ssrc=815258372, fraction_lost=96, packet_loss=13713522, last_seq=3314313929, jitter=2878956247, last_sr=2456273253, delay_since_last_sr=3351655681 Apr 9 20:14:07 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: INFO: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08 port 8001]: Confirmed peer address as 72.214.35.171:57732 Apr 9 20:14:12 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: ERR: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08 port 8000]: SRTP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated Apr 9 20:14:17 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08] version=2, padding=0, count=1, payloadtype=200, length=12, ssrc=2045607967, ntp_sec=2811881700, ntp_fractions=4080266212, rtp_ts=371429680, sender_packets=958830616, sender_bytes=2579186043, ssrc=1909756377, fraction_lost=174, packet_loss=11416637, last_seq=3106722675, jitter=758758394, last_sr=2663618457, delay_since_last_sr=1399181077 Apr 9 20:14:27 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: ERR: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08 port 8000]: SRTP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated Apr 9 20:14:27 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: ERR: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08 port 8001]: SRTCP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated Apr 9 20:14:27 centos-1024mb-nyc-02 rtpengine[58959]: [a5ca8335-84d2-4daf-a0e2-6465e72b6d08] version=2, padding=0, cou It is how I have programmed it in my Kamailio configuration. ON INVITE rtpengine_offer("replace-origin replace-session-connection ICE=remove UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP"); ON 200-ok rtpengine_answer("replace-origin replace-session-connection ICE=remove UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP"); Best Regards, Aqs Younas

1 2

RTPengine - Transcoding example available?
by Carsten Bock 10 Apr '18

10 Apr '18

Hi, Quick (and simple) question: Can someone provide a working RTPengine request, to enable Transcoding? I know, this is possible, but I thought before looking into deep, how this should be configured for the rtpengine_offer() command, could someone provide an example? Thanks, Carsten

6 13

Re: [SR-Users] First Invite
by Duarte Rocha 10 Apr '18

10 Apr '18

Thank you very much!! That seems to be the solution. Cheers

1 0

First Invite
by Duarte Rocha 10 Apr '18

10 Apr '18

Greetings, How can i identify the first Invite received by Kamailio in a dialog. I'm checking for the To-Tag in order to identify the first one. However, if the UA retries the same INVITE (because of a timeout for example), it won't have To Tag and it won't be the first INVITE that i'm receiving in that dialog. Is there any flag or variable that i can use to identify the first Invite received? Thanks in advance

2 1

← Newer
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Older →

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 2018