sr-users April 2022

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

49 participants
60 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, 1 week

kamcmd autocompletion

by Antoine DEBARRE

Hi, I just installed kamailio v5.5 via deb.kamailio.org packages (debian 11). Seems that kamcmd autocompletion doesn't work at all. It is OK for v5.4 via official debian packages (packages.debian.org/bullseye/kamailio) Best regards, -- <https://app.livestorm.co/comdata-group/metaverse-what-will-cx-look-like-in-…>

4 months, 1 week

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, 1 week

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, 3 weeks

Development for v5.6.x is frozen

by Daniel-Constantin Mierla

Hello, the formal notification that the development for the next major version 5.6.0 is now frozen. The focus has to be on testing the master branch. Also, the master branch should not get commits with new features till the branch 5.6 is created, expected to happen in 2-4 weeks, a matter of how testing goes on. Meanwhile, the commits with new features in the C code can be pushed to personal branches, new pull requests can still be done, but they will be merged after branching 5.6. Can still be done commits with documentation improvements, enhancements to related tools (e.g., kamctl, kamcmd), merging exiting pull requests at this moment, exporting missing KEMI functions and completing the functionality of the new modules added for 5.6. Once the branch 5.6 is created, new features can be pushed again to master branch as usual. From that moment, the v5.6.0 should be out very soon, time used for further testing but also preparing the release of packages. If someone is not sure if a commit brings a new feature, just make a pull request and it can be discussed there on github portal or via sr-dev mailing list. A summary of what is new in upcoming 5.6 is going to be built at: * https://www.kamailio.org/wiki/features/new-in-5.6.x Upgrade guidelines will be collected at: * https://www.kamailio.org/wiki/install/upgrade/5.5.x-to-5.6.0 Everyone is more than welcome to contribute to the above wiki pages, especially to the upgrade guidelines, to help everyone else during the migration process from v5.5.x to 5.6.x. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

11 months

Problem with Record-Route in Public to Private Network

by Carlos Escalona

Hello! I wish everyone who reads this message a good day. I would appreciate some guidance with the configuration of my Kamailio. Initially, I have the following architecture: Endpoints <----Public IP----> Kamailio (listen PrivateIP advertise PublicIP) <----Private IP----> Asterisk CONFIG: https://gist.github.com/Carlos-Escalona94/3a289af05b05c69ae563ab29c9ec4710 In general, calls initiated from outside the system work perfectly, but I have a problem with calls initiated from Asterisk. According to what I was able to investigate and understand, the problem arises from the fact that Kamailio uses the public IP for the entire routing system that involves the Record-Route and Route Headers. This in turn causes Asterisk to get lost trying to send messages outside of the INITIAL INVITE transaction, for example, the ACK response to the 200 Ok received from the Endpoint since it tries to use Kamailio's public IP to which Asterisk doesn't have access. I tried to force Asterisk to send all messages to Kamailio's private IP regardless of their nature, but it doesn't seem like an appropriate solution. On the other hand, I tried to modify the architecture a bit so that it was something similar to this: Endpoints <---- Public IP----> Kamailio (listen PrivateIP:P1 advertise PublicIP) <---- PrivateIP-----> Kamailio (listen PrivateIP:P2) <---- PrivateIP ----> Asterisk CONFIG: https://gist.github.com/Carlos-Escalona94/4d681bb189c6190941d291965e123889 It seems to me that this would solve the problem, but I have two doubts about this architecture, the first is that I would like to know if there is an easier way to solve the problem that I am not considering, and on the other hand, I have not found a way to identify from which interface is receiving the message to perform the routing properly. Thanks for the attention. -- *Esta mensagem pode conter informação confidencial ou privilegiada, sendo seu sigilo protegido por lei. Se você não for o destinatário ou a pessoa autorizada a receber esta mensagem, não pode usar, copiar ou divulgar as informações nela contidas ou tomar qualquer ação baseada nessas informações. Se você recebeu esta mensagem por engano, por favor, avise imediatamente ao remetente, respondendo o e-mail e em seguida apague-a. Agradecemos sua cooperação. ** * *This message may contain confidential or privileged information and its confidentiality is protected by law. If you are not the addressed or authorized person to receive this message, you must not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on it or any information herein. If you have received this message by mistake, please advise the sender immediately by replying the e-mail and then deleting it. Thank you for your cooperation. *

11 months

Getting "uac.reg_add" to work (documentation unclarities)

by Rick van Rein

Hello, I am trying to make UAC register with a SIP telco. But when I run... shell$ kamctl rpc uac.reg_add mydomain.com 0123456789 myteldomain.com 0123456789 sip6.telco.nl telcoreseller.nl 999999 secretpw . udp:sip6.telco.nl 360 0 10 'udp:[fd8:9::10]:5090' ...it gives me the cryptic response... ERROR: jsonrpcs [jsonrpcs_mod.c:666]: jsonrpc_scan(): field is not a string - type 3 The module docs only give "..." as example of attributes. And, according to... http://www.kamailio.net/docs/modules/5.4.x/modules/uac.html#uac.r.uac.reg_a… https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/blob/5.4.4/src/modules/uac/uac_reg.c#1… ...it also seems to be behind on diff_expires, timer_expires, reg_init. What I am missing is the format, and in some cases the purpose of attributes. Could you help me to an example, perhaps based on the command I am trying? Thanks, -Rick P.S. It's been years since I worked with OpenSIPS. It feels like Kamailio is friendlier, and easier to use.

11 months, 1 week

Dispatcher Usage and change of $rU

by Benoît Panizzon

Hi Gang I have a observation which I don't understand... Let's assume we have an inbound $rU = 12345 And I want to change $rU outbound to 0012345 Doing: $rU = "0012345"; ds_select_dst("2000"),"6"); route(RELAY) The call is being sent out with unaltered R-URI Username: 12345 Doing: $rU = "0012345"; ds_select_domain("2000", "6"); route(RELAY); The call is being sent out with the intended new R-URI Username: 0012345 Looking at the docs: https://kamailio.org/docs/modules/5.4.x/modules/dispatcher.html#dispatcher.… I can not figure out, why I see this difference. -- Mit freundlichen Grüssen -Benoît Panizzon- @ HomeOffice und normal erreichbar -- I m p r o W a r e A G - Leiter Commerce Kunden ______________________________________________________ Zurlindenstrasse 29 Tel +41 61 826 93 00 CH-4133 Pratteln Fax +41 61 826 93 01 Schweiz Web http://www.imp.ch ______________________________________________________

11 months, 1 week

Incorrect Socket and Tcpconn-Id with Mid-Registrar and WebSockets

by Grant Bagdasarian

Hi, We're attempting to implement a mid-registrar for websocket connections but are running into some issues where the tcpconn-id and socket attributes are not stored correctly in memory (usrloc). REGISTER Flow: UA1 -> P1 (Mid-Registrar) ~> P2 (Core Proxy/Registrar) INVITE Flow: UA2 -> P2 -> P1 -> UA1 UA1: baresip cli connecting to P1 using websockets UA2: softphone Everything is running locally on a dev machine, and we're using Docker to launch P1 and P2. The below code snippet is what we use on P1, and has been simplified. The general idea is as following: 1) UA1 sets up the websocket connection and sends a REGISTER request to P1 2) P1 checks if this request has already been sent to P2 2.a) If not, then relay the request to P2. Upon receiving a 200 OK from P2 we save the registration in usrloc 2.b) If so, then absorb the request (save) and generate a reply 3) UA2 tries to call UA1 via P1 and P2 The problem occurs at 2.a since the REGISTER request is forwarded using UDP and the 200 OK is also received using UDP. When the registration is stored in reply route, the Socket (udp:x.x.x.x:xxxx) and Tcpconn-Id (-1) are not set to what we would prefer (see Output 1) TCP was also tried as the transport between P1 and P2. Upon receiving the reply from P2 the Tcpconn-Id and Socket of the connection between P1 and P2 was saved in the binding. When 2.b occurs the Socket and Tcpconn-Id are set to the correct values (see Output 2) Making a call when the binding state is at 2.a we receive the following error: "TCP/TLS connection (id: 0) for WebSocket could not be found" Making a call when the binding state is at 2.b works perfectly fine since the correct Tcpconn-Id is set. We did find a solution, or rather a workaround to this issue: 1) Always call the save function in request_route 2) If P2 responds with an error (non-200 OK) use the unregister function to remove the binding We also tried the tcpops tcp_set_otcpid and tcp_set_otcpid_flag functions after lookup, but this didn't do anything. KEMI Script def ksr_request_route(self, msg): if kemi.is_REGISTER(): aor = "aor" if result := kemi.htable.sht_is_null("registrations", aor) == 1: kemi.tm.t_on_reply("ksr_register_reply_route") kemi.dispatcher.ds_select_dst(1, 4) kemi.tm.t_relay() return 1 kemi.registrar.save("registrations", 1) return 1 if kemi.is_INVITE(): aor = "aor" if result := kemi.registrar.lookup_uri("registrations", aor): kemi.tm.t_relay() return 1 def ksr_register_reply_route(self, msg): if kemi.tm.t_check_status("200") == 1: kemi.registrar.save("registrations", 1) aor = "aor" kemi.htable.sht_sets("registrations", aor, "") return 1 Output 1: Binding state when request is being forwarded kamcmd ul.dump { Domains: { Domain: { Domain: registrations Size: 1024 AoRs: { Info: { AoR: grant(a)127.0.0.1 HashID: 409622189 Contacts: { Contact: { Address: sip:grant-0x7fe915a79138@172.16.99.12:9;transport=ws Expires: 13 Q: 1.000000 Call-ID: 7cdfbf93f23bb54f CSeq: 34818 User-Agent: n/a Received: sip:192.168.80.1:62184;transport=ws Path: [not set] State: CS_NEW Flags: 1 CFlags: 20 Socket: udp:10.2.0.15:5060 Methods: -1 Ruid: uloc-626a80d3-46-1 Instance: <urn:uuid:c67df38d-d5e0-e834-1d98-a8df2d3f291b> Reg-Id: 0 Server-Id: 0 Tcpconn-Id: -1 Keepalive: 0 Last-Keepalive: 1651146965 KA-Roundtrip: 0 Last-Modified: 1651146965 } } } } Stats: { Records: 1 Max-Slots: 1 } } } } kamcmd core.tcp_list { id: 1 type: WS state: CONN_OK timeout: 2 lifetime: 120 ref_count: 2 src_ip: 192.168.80.1 src_port: 62184 dst_ip: 192.168.80.15 dst_port: 80 } kamcmd ws.dump { connections: { 1: ws:192.168.80.1:62184 -> ws:192.168.80.15:80 (state: OPEN, last used 3s ago, sub-protocol: sip) } info: { wscounter: 1 truncated: no } } Output 2: Binding state when request is being absorbed kamcmd ul.dump { Domains: { Domain: { Domain: registrations Size: 1024 AoRs: { Info: { AoR: grant(a)127.0.0.1 HashID: 409622189 Contacts: { Contact: { Address: sip:grant-0x7fe915a79138@172.16.99.12:9;transport=ws Expires: 9 Q: 1.000000 Call-ID: 7cdfbf93f23bb54f CSeq: 34819 User-Agent: baresip v2.0.2 (x86_64/darwin) Received: sip:192.168.80.1:62184;transport=ws Path: [not set] State: CS_NEW Flags: 1 CFlags: 20 Socket: tcp:192.168.80.15:80 Methods: 5087 Ruid: uloc-626a80d3-46-1 Instance: <urn:uuid:c67df38d-d5e0-e834-1d98-a8df2d3f291b> Reg-Id: 0 Server-Id: 0 Tcpconn-Id: 1 Keepalive: 0 Last-Keepalive: 1651146979 KA-Roundtrip: 0 Last-Modified: 1651146979 } } } } Stats: { Records: 1 Max-Slots: 1 } } } } kamcmd core.tcp_list { id: 1 type: WS state: CONN_OK timeout: 3 lifetime: 120 ref_count: 2 src_ip: 192.168.80.1 src_port: 62184 dst_ip: 192.168.80.15 dst_port: 80 } kamcmd ws.dump { connections: { 1: ws:192.168.80.1:62184 -> ws:192.168.80.15:80 (state: OPEN, last used 1s ago, sub-protocol: sip) } info: { wscounter: 1 truncated: no } }

11 months, 1 week

TOPOS, 183 (before a 200OK) and SIP INFO

by Giovanni Tommasini

Hi kamailiers, I ask your help for a strange situation with topos, 183 (before a 200OK) and SIP INFO My topology is kamailio in front of asterisks; so kamailio has 2 interfaces (1Public to talk with customers and carriers and 1 Private to talk with asterisk). In the image: - the first column is the customer - the second is the public interface of kamailio - the third is the private interface of kamaiio - the fourth is asterisk As you can see in the image, the customer send an INVITE and the carrier give back the IVR messages in a 183 (before a 200OK) asking for an IVR selection. The customer (configured to use SIP INFO) types a key and sends in INFO, but as you can see kamailio sends the INFO to himself to private interface instead of sending it to asterisk as if the contact that handled topos contained incorrect information. [image: Schermata 2022-04-26 alle 19.40.32.png] - If the customer is configured with a RFC2833 - or if the IVR messages is not in a 183 but is sent after a 200OK - or if I disabe TOPOS *all works fine* I used kamailio 5.5.3, I also try to upgrade to 5.5.4 but nothing change Maybe could be connected with https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/2344 https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/1077 Could be a kamailio bug for this particular situation or am I getting lost in a glass of water? thanks a lot cheers Giovanni Tommasini *evoseed s.r.l.* phone: +39 340 11 28 800 mail: giovanni.tommasini(a)evoseed.io site: evoseed.io address: Via Lucrezio 13, Trieste Italy

11 months, 1 week

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 2022