sr-users March 2022

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

62 participants
88 discussions

enable topology hiding on one side or dynamic ip in topoh module Contact and Via Header

by Patrick Karton

Hello , im using kamailio with two interfaces external and internal. i need a way either to : * enable topoh hiding only when outgoing interface is external ( mask contact and Via ip only when ougoing interface is external * or if it is not possible to enable it only in one direction.i want to know how to configure dynamic(for example in xavp or avp) ip to put in Contact and Via when topoh is enabled. i see that the 'mask_ip' parameter of topoh module is a string. so we can not set a dynamic value here unfortunately. Thanks

1 month

Possibility of mirroring the rpm/deb.kamailio.org repos efficiently via rsync?

by Malte Schmidt

Hello, is there an rsync endpoint available or is there a possiblity of setting this up? Creating a mirror via HTTP is a rather quick and dirty solution and while the deb-repo can be mirrored using debmirror, the rpm repo is hard to sync to a non-CentOS-based machine due to missing dependencies such as yum and reposync in latest Debian-based systems. Would be great to get some input in regards to this topic. Cheers

9 months

Re: [SR-Users] TOPOS (5.1.[23]) breaks PRACK

by Daniel Tryba

On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 04:44:14PM +0200, Daniel Tryba wrote: > Sure. Attached. Problem appears to be that the topos query can't find > callid-totag (from the response). > > I'll try the same scenario with the mysql backend to see if it behaves > different. Config works fine with mysql as topos backend. So the bug is restricted to topos-redis.

10 months, 2 weeks

Intermittent error seen when using a python script in kamailio

by Wojciech Kopciewicz

Hi, Intermittently we are observing the following error when checking if given header is present in SIP INVITE: SystemError: returned a result with an error set The complete stack trace is (some names redacted): 11(28) ERROR: {1 195 INVITE nMHZDN.10nOIDt4ldOwz5cqz0XnMepA9} app_python3 [python_support.c:156]: python_handle_exception(): apy_exec: modify_headers((null)): Unhandled exception in the Python code: TypeError: an integer is required (got type NoneType) The above exception was the direct cause of the following exception: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/etc/kamailio/kamailio.py", line 25, in modify_headers self.modify_header("SomeHeader") File "/etc/kamailio/kamailio.py", line 29, in modify_header present = KSR.hdr.is_present(header_name) SystemError: returned a result with an error set Kamailio version (kamailio -v output): version: kamailio 5.4.6 (x86_64/linux) flags: USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS, DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC, Q_MALLOC, F_MALLOC, TLSF_MALLOC, DBG_SR_MEMORY, USE_FUTEX, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST, HAVE_RESOLV_RES, TLS_PTHREAD_MUTEX_SHARED ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS 1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select. id: unknown compiled with gcc 8.3.0 Operation system: Linux kamailio-5c7484c74d-vhhr8 5.4.0-1056-azure #58~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Jul 28 23:14:18 UTC 2021 x86_64 GNU/Linux Are you able to help me find the root cause of this issue? Pozdrawiam / Best regards, Wojtek -- *For more information on how and why we collect your personal information, please visit our Privacy Policy <https://www.motorolasolutions.com/en_us/about/privacy-policy.html?elqTrackI…>.*

10 months, 4 weeks

Roadmap to the next major release - v5.6.0

by Daniel-Constantin Mierla

Hello, it is the time to plan a bit the road to the next major release, to be versioned 5.6.0. The 5.5.0 was release about one year ago, therefore it is time to set the milestones for getting 5.6.0 out. I would propose to freeze the development on Thursday, April 14, 2020, test till mid of May or so, then release v5.6.0. There is a lot of development to existing components and a couple of new modules. If anyone wants a different time line towards 5.6.0, let's discuss and choose the one that suits most of the developers. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

11 months, 1 week

How to submit updates for core documentation?

by Ben Kaufman

Hello, I had a small patch merged for 5.6 to add preprocessor macros #!trydefenv and #!trydefenvs. (https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/2967), but they need documentation. I believe that they should ultimately end up on this page: https://www.kamailio.org/wiki/cookbooks/devel/core. I don't see this in the /doc section of the repo. What's the process for me to submit this documentation? Ben Kaufman Sr. VoIP Engineer - BCM One +1.612.735.9309 bkaufman(a)bcmone.com<mailto:bkaufman@bcmone.com> 24 hour client support: +1.855.639.6300 [https://www.bcmone.com/files/bcmone-logo.png]<https://www.bcmone.com/> [https://www.bcmone.com/files/twitter-icon-circle.png] <https://www.facebook.com/bcmonenyc/> [https://www.bcmone.com/files/twitter-icon-circle.png] <https://twitter.com/bcm_one/> [https://www.bcmone.com/files/linkedin-icon-circle.png] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/business-communications-management/> NOTE: This e-mail and any attachments are from BCM One, Inc. and are intended solely for the use and review of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. If you believe you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete the e-mail (and any attachments) from your computer and do not copy or disclose it to anyone else.

11 months, 2 weeks

Re: [SR-Users] More than TCP 800 concurrent calls, slows Kamailio (LUA FILE API REQUESTS)

by Henning Westerholt

Hello, please keep the list in CC, that others can comment as well. Beside from the obvious (improving the performance of the lua API call), you could use indeed asynchronous processing. If you just use the lua code to emit the REST request, using a native http client module would be probably also faster as doing it over lua. Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: Giovanni Jose <gio.jose(a)gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2022 5:17 PM To: Henning Westerholt <hw(a)gilawa.com> Subject: Re: [SR-Users] More than TCP 800 concurrent calls, slows Kamailio (LUA FILE API REQUESTS) Hello Henning, Thanks so much for the fast response I just commented the loop and I was hitting the backend and it's slow anyway maybe it's because, for this type of implementation when the destination of the call is decided by the API backend, I need to use the http_async_client module? I am noticing that for high volume calls kamailio slows the traffic and shows errors because there's a delay that is been added when the backend responds for every call. On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 11:53 PM Henning Westerholt <hw(a)gilawa.com<mailto:hw@gilawa.com>> wrote: Hello, why are you sleeping for 1s in the loop? This will cause Kamailio to block processing. I also do not see any stop condition on the loop, so it will loop until the limit. Cheers, Henning -- Henning Westerholt – https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services – https://gilawa.com<https://gilawa.com/> From: sr-users <sr-users-bounces(a)lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.kamailio.org>> On Behalf Of Giovanni Jose Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 9:46 PM To: sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> Subject: [SR-Users] More than TCP 800 concurrent calls, slows Kamailio (LUA FILE API REQUESTS) Hello Guys I am having this issue where kamailio is receiving requests from SIPp (we are currently testing the platform and doing QA) but if we do more than 800 concurrent calls kamailio starts failing and slowing the requests, The scenario is the following: I am sending 5000 calls at 100 CPS on TCP and I am having this route in the configuration file: # Handle the calls to api route[CALL_API] { xlog("L_NOTICE"," Call request $var(call_request) method: $rm \n"); $var(loop_true)=1; while ($var(loop_true)) { if(!lua_run("call_request","$var(call_request)","$sht(token=>new_token)")) { xlog("L_NOTICE", "SCRIPT: failed to execute lua function!\n"); } if ($var(loop_true)){ sleep("1"); } } xlog("L_NOTICE", "SCRIPT: Sucess to execute lua function!\n"); } So I am executing a LUA script for the requests and the API response will tell the destination of the call. At 800 concurrent calls, I can notice SLOWLINESS in the SIPp testing tool, and then I will start receiving 408 timeouts. This sounds like a load issue or something because I believe there's a time that it's been added every time we hit the backend and wait for the response. any help will be appreciated Regards Gio

11 months, 2 weeks

Asterisk, unable to find dialog for ACK with route param and call-id

by Trevor Peirce

Hello, I'm having some trouble with what I think is the dialog module. I've got Kamailio 5.5.4 running well for some time. Recently I added Asterisk to the mix and have come across an issue. Call to Kamailio. Kamailio sends it to Asterisk. Asterisk may decide to "forward" the call. To do this it will place a new outbound call through Kamailio. From the user perspective, this works absolutely fine (invite, ringing, ok, bye). The acc module handles it fine also. However dialog does not, and the events for ok and bye do not fire on the original call. They do fire for the forwarded call. I've added some logging output to try to isolate the problem, but I'm no further ahead. Here's what I have. Any suggestions? ** Call initiated ** INFO: <script>: onreply_route[MANAGE_REPLY] branch [0] rm=INVITE rs=100 ru=<null> tu=sip:destination@endpoint DLG_status=<null> dlg-h-id=3360 INFO: <script>: onreply_route[MANAGE_REPLY] branch [0] rm=INVITE rs=100 ru=<null> tu=sip:fwddest@0.0.0.1:5060 DLG_status=<null> dlg-h-id=12036 INFO: <script>: onreply_route[MANAGE_REPLY] branch [0] rm=INVITE rs=183 ru=<null> tu=sip:fwddest@0.0.0.1:5060 DLG_status=<null> dlg-h-id=12036 INFO: <script>: onreply_route[MANAGE_REPLY] branch [0] rm=INVITE rs=183 ru=<null> tu=sip:destination@endpoint DLG_status=<null> dlg-h-id=3360 INFO: <script>: onreply_route[MANAGE_REPLY] branch [0] rm=INVITE rs=200 ru=<null> tu=sip:fwddest@0.0.0.1:5060 DLG_status=<null> dlg-h-id=12036 CRITICAL: dialog [dlg_timer.c:200]: update_dlg_timer(): Trying to update a bogus dlg tl=0x7fa0494006e8 tl->next=(nil) tl->prev=(nil) ERROR: dialog [dlg_hash.c:1329]: update_dlg_timeout(): failed to update dialog lifetime CRITICAL: dialog [dlg_timer.c:200]: update_dlg_timer(): Trying to update a bogus dlg tl=0x7fa0494006e8 tl->next=(nil) tl->prev=(nil) ERROR: dialog [dlg_hash.c:1329]: update_dlg_timeout(): failed to update dialog lifetime ERROR: dialog [dlg_profile.c:1028]: dlg_set_timeout_by_profile(): Unable to set timeout on 3306:12036 NOTICE: acc [acc.c:270]: acc_log_request(): ACC: transaction answered: timestamp=1648611824;time_unix=1648611824.346;method=INVITE;from_tag=as292200a1;to_tag=as75834dc4;call_id=7cef233547dca0ac7882ce5249b3b54c;code=200;reason=OK INFO: <script>: onreply_route[MANAGE_REPLY] branch [0] rm=INVITE rs=200 ru=<null> tu=sip:destination@endpoint DLG_status=<null> dlg-h-id=<null> NOTICE: acc [acc.c:270]: acc_log_request(): ACC: transaction answered: timestamp=1648611824;time_unix=1648611824.354;method=INVITE;from_tag=as730369e7;to_tag=as3b06b3e2;call_id=53bad4f0034b61a5745163d82daef402;code=200;reason=OK INFO: <script>: onreply_route[MANAGE_REPLY] branch [0] rm=INVITE rs=200 ru=<null> tu=sip:destination@endpoint DLG_status=<null> dlg-h-id=<null> WARNING: dialog [dlg_handlers.c:1328]: dlg_onroute(): unable to find dialog for ACK with route param '161.02d' [353:3360] and call-id '53bad4f0034b61a5745163d82daef402' WARNING: dialog [dlg_handlers.c:1328]: dlg_onroute(): unable to find dialog for ACK with route param '161.02d' [353:3360] and call-id '53bad4f0034b61a5745163d82daef402' ** The call is answered and endpoints can talk to each other ** ** Now the original caller hangs up ** WARNING: dialog [dlg_handlers.c:1328]: dlg_onroute(): unable to find dialog for BYE with route param '161.02d' [353:3360] and call-id '53bad4f0034b61a5745163d82daef402' NOTICE: acc [acc.c:270]: acc_log_request(): ACC: transaction answered: timestamp=1648611831;time_unix=1648611831.933;method=BYE;from_tag=as730369e7;to_tag=as3b06b3e2;call_id=53bad4f0034b61a5745163d82daef402;code=200;reason=OK INFO: <script>: onreply_route[MANAGE_REPLY] branch [0] rm=INVITE rs=100 ru=<null> tu=sip:fwddest@0.0.0.1:5060 DLG_status=<null> dlg-h-id=12036 INFO: <script>: onreply_route[MANAGE_REPLY] branch [0] rm=INVITE rs=200 ru=<null> tu=sip:fwddest@0.0.0.1:5060 DLG_status=<null> dlg-h-id=12036 ERROR: <script>: got result for bye = Bye!; DLG_lifetime = 8 NOTICE: acc [acc.c:270]: acc_log_request(): ACC: transaction answered: timestamp=1648611832;time_unix=1648611832.115;method=BYE;from_tag=as292200a1;to_tag=as75834dc4;call_id=7cef233547dca0ac7882ce5249b3b54c;code=200;reason=OK ERROR: dialog [dlg_handlers.c:363]: dlg_terminated_confirmed(): failed to get dialog from params! ** Everything ends cleanly on the other SIP endpoints ** What can I do from here to try to isolate this further? Thanks, -- Trevor Peirce AcroVoice Solutions Inc

11 months, 3 weeks

RTPENGINE : Kamailio - Get status if max sessions reached

by Youssef Boujraf

Dear, QUESTION : Through kamailio,We are using rtpengine_manage and the return value is true or false but don"t know for which reason. * How to be informed if rtpengine reach the maximum of sessions and will not accept any rtp routing ? * We have seen if rtpengine reached the max-session; The call is accept by kamailio and finally no audio because SDP not processed- kamailio.log Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: ALERT: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} <script>: [NATMANAGE] branch_id:0 ruri: sip:9919993@public:32617;transport=UDP;rinstance=f5d124565504bdb6, method:INVITE, status:<null>, extra_id: z9hG4bK-524287-1---290944f5547c740a0, rtpengine_manage: replace-origin replace-session-connection via-branch=extraMar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine_funcs.c:144]: check_content_type(): type <application/sdp> found validMar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:1834]: build_rtpp_socks(): same rtpengines list version: 1 (1648562844)Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3276]: select_rtpp_node_old(): rtpengine hash table lookup failed to find node for calllen=24 callid=nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ.. viabranch=z9hG4bK-524287-1---290944f5547c740a0Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3167]: select_rtpp_node_new(): sum is = 27Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2691]: rtpp_function_call(): proxy reply: d6:result10:load limit7:message30:Parallel session limit reachedeMar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: INFO: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2715]: rtpp_function_call(): proxy udp:192.168.1.33:2223 has reached its load limit (Parallel session limit reached) - trying next oneMar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:1834]: build_rtpp_socks(): same rtpengines list version: 1 (1648562844) Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3276]: select_rtpp_node_old(): rtpengine hash table lookup failed to find node for calllen=24 callid=nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ.. viabranch=z9hG4bK-524287-1---290944f5547c740a0 Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3167]: select_rtpp_node_new(): sum is = 27 Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2691]: rtpp_function_call(): proxy reply: d6:result10:load limit7:message30:Parallel session limit reachede Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: INFO: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2715]: rtpp_function_call(): proxy udp:127.0.0.1:2223 has reached its load limit (Parallel session limit reached) - trying next one Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:1834]: build_rtpp_socks(): same rtpengines list version: 1 (1648562844) Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3276]: select_rtpp_node_old(): rtpengine hash table lookup failed to find node for calllen=24 callid=nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ.. viabranch=z9hG4bK-524287-1---290944f5547c740a0 Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3167]: select_rtpp_node_new(): sum is = 27 Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: INFO: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2900]: rtpp_test(): rtpengine instance <udp:127.0.0.1:2223> found, support for it enabled Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: INFO: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2900]: rtpp_test(): rtpengine instance <udp:192.168.1.33:2223> found, support for it enabled Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3167]: select_rtpp_node_new(): sum is = 27 Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: ERROR: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3330]: select_rtpp_node(): rtpengine failed to select new for calllen=24 callid=nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ.. Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21065]: ERROR: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2678]: rtpp_function_call(): no available proxies Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21070]: ALERT: {2 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} <script>: [NATMANAGE] branch_id:0 ruri: <null>, method:INVITE, status:100, extra_id: z9hG4bK-524287-1---290944f5547c740a0, rtpengine_manage: replace-origin replace-session-connection trust-address via-branch=extra Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21069]: ALERT: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} <script>: [NATMANAGE] branch_id:1 ruri: sip:9919993@public:32617;transport=UDP;rinstance=f5d124565504bdb6, method:INVITE, status:<null>, extra_id: z9hG4bK-524287-1---290944f5547c740a0, rtpengine_manage: replace-origin replace-session-connection Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21069]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:1834]: build_rtpp_socks(): same rtpengines list version: 1 (1648562844) Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21069]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3276]: select_rtpp_node_old(): rtpengine hash table lookup failed to find node for calllen=24 callid=nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ.. viabranch= Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21069]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:3167]: select_rtpp_node_new(): sum is = 27 Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21069]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2691]: rtpp_function_call(): proxy reply: d7:warning38:Call-ID not found or tags didn't match6:result2:oke Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21069]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2784]: rtpp_function_call(): rtpengine hash table insert node=udp:192.168.1.33:2223 for calllen=24 callid=nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ.. viabranch= Mar 29 16:08:14 kamailio /usr/sbin/kamailio[21069]: DEBUG: {1 2 INVITE nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..} rtpengine [rtpengine.c:2801]: rtpp_function_call(): rtpengine hash table remove entry for callen=24 callid=nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ.. viabranch= - rtpengine.log : Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: INFO: [nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..]: [control] Received command 'offer' from 192.168.1.41:42822 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: DEBUG: [nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..]: [control] Dump for 'offer' from 192.168.1.41:42822: { "supports": [ "load limit" ], "sdp": "v=0 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: o=Zoiper 141319690 1 IN IP4 192.168.30.216 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: s=Z Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: c=IN IP4 192.168.30.216 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: t=0 0 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: m=audio 8000 RTP/AVP 0 101 8 3 97 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: a=fmtp:101 0-16 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: a=rtpmap:97 iLBC/8000 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: a=fmtp:97 mode=30 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: a=sendrecv Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: ", "replace": [ "origin", "session-connection" ], "call-id": "nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..", "via-branch": "z9hG4bK-524287-1---290944f5547c740a0", "received-from": [ "IP4", "public" ], "from-tag": "75983054", "command": "offer" } Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: ERR: [nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..]: [core] Parallel session limit reached (2) Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: INFO: [nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..]: [control] Replying to 'offer' from 192.168.1.41:42822 (elapsed time 0.000058 sec) Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: DEBUG: [nIdGvZZNiFnt3_r0xSIKpQ..]: [control] Response dump for 'offer' to 192.168.1.41:42822: { "result": "load limit", "message": "Parallel session limit reached" } Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: INFO: [control] Received command 'ping' from 192.168.1.41:42822 Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: DEBUG: [control] Dump for 'ping' from 192.168.1.41:42822: { "command": "ping" } Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: INFO: [control] Replying to 'ping' from 192.168.1.41:42822 (elapsed time 0.000001 sec) Mar 29 16:08:14 rtp01srv rtpengine[3921]: DEBUG: [control] Response dump for 'ping' to 192.168.1.41:42822: { "result": "pong" } How to get this information then we could cancel the call or send sip message that the number of max call is reached ? -- Youssef

11 months, 3 weeks

Kamailio PCSCF route logic

by Weiqi Yao

Hello community, We made some modifications to Kamailio PCSCF sample cfg file, so when PCSCF receiving an tcp SUBSCRIBE message it add ;transport=tcp to the end of Contact URI. Below is what we added the route block right after if (is_method("INVITE|SUBSCRIBE")) logic if (is_method("SUBSCRIBE") && proto=='tcp') { $var(original_contact_header) = $ct; $var(new_contact_header) = $(var(original_contact_header){re.subst,/(.*:.*)(>);/\1;transport=tcp>/g}); remove_hf("Contact"); append_hf("Contact: $var(new_contact_header)\r\n"); msg_apply_changes(); } We did see the ;transport=tcp been added but we also seeing a bad line ;alias=[...] is added before the To: line [cid:image001.png@01D84375.8D109B20] Does anyone know what function might cause this ;alias been added before To: line? BR, Weiqi

11 months, 3 weeks

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

sr-users March 2022