Hi everybody,
I'm just testing Kamailio 5.4.1 with dialog replication over DMQ. This
seems to work very good. Dialogs are replicated without problems.
When I'm restarting one node I would have expected, that all dialogs are
synced again, just like in dmq_usrloc.
But this does not happen. After a restart the nodes dialog-list is empty.
Did I miss somethin? Is there a special parameter that I have to set?
BR, Björn
--
Björn Klasen, Specialist
TNG Stadtnetz GmbH, Network Management (VoIP)
Projensdorfer Straße 324
24106 Kiel
Germany
T +49 431/ 530530
F +49 431/ 7097-555
mailto: bklasen(a)tng.de
http://www.tng.de
Register: Amtsgericht Kiel HRB 6002 KI
Executive board (Geschäftsführung): Dr.-Ing. Volkmar Hausberg,
Sven Schade, Carsten Tolkmit, Dr. Sven Willert
Tax-Id (Steuernr.): 2029047020, VAT-Id (USt-Id): DE225201428
Hi,
I am building a configuration script where for some traffic flows
parallel forking will be needed, and in this case I need to go beyond
the default max limit of the max amount of branches.
Apart from this specific case the traffic load that kamailio will need
to handle is very low, let's say just one second here and there with up
to 5 concurrent calls at most.
This limit is as far as I understand set here:
usr/local/src/kamailio-5.6/kamailio/src/core/config.h
And the default limit is:
#define MAX_BRANCHES_LIMIT 32 /*!< limit of maximum
number of branches per transaction */
Here are the questions I have related to this:
1) If I increase the value of this constant in config.h, how high is it
reasonable to set this value and still have a stable system?
2) If I increase MAX_BRANCHES_LIMIT beyond 32, are there also other
parameters that needs to be changed for the system to be able to cope,
and if so whichparameters?
Regards,
Lars
Hi All,
I am facing an issue in understanding how the min_se should be working in
kamailio. As per the SST documentation, it seems like if the min_se is
configured as 500, then any value of Session-Expires OR MIN-SE if lower
than 500, can be responded to by a 422.
However, I strangely see the reverse happening. To investigate further, I
looked in to the ki_sst_check_min() code in the master, and these seems
like a potential issue.
Ref Code: Inside ki_sst_check_min(), there is an if condition like below:
if (sst_min_se < MIN(minse, se.interval)) {
However, shouldn't it be the other way around? ie
if (sst_min_se > MIN(minse, se.interval)) {
because we need to send 422 if the received value(in INVITE etc) is
smaller than the sst configure min_se value?
I also found a different documentation, at
https://git.sgu.ru/oldssu/ex-opensips/blob/cb9df8d59dbb254a9d862569fd5d11f6…
where
the check is as below?
if (sst_min_se > MIN(minse, se.interval)) {
Can someone confirm if this is broken, or my understanding is incorrect?
Regards,
Harneet
--
"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how
improbable, must be the truth" - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Hi List,
we are running several stateless SIP Loadbalancers using Kamaillio 5.1 and 5.6.
Now we would like to perform an async_http request if an INVITE matches certain criteria. The request itself is performed very similar to how it's described here [1]
This uses the transaction module in order to assure that the response can be mapped to the original request. However, this also means that the processing of the entire request becomes stateful which we would like to avoid.
We tried to use t_release() in the callback route (in [1] this route is called "RELAY_API_RESPONSE"). However, documentation says that this is only allowed in the REQUEST_ROUTE.
Is there an easy way to circumnavigate this issue?
Cheers
[1]: https://wazo-platform.org/blog/kamailio-routing-with-rtjson-and-http-async-…
--
Julius Flohr - Voice Engineer - flohr(a)sipgate.de
Telefon: +49 (0)211-63 55 55-0
Mobil: +49 (0)1579-000-0205
Telefax: +49 (0)211-63 55 55-22
sipgate GmbH - Gladbacher Str. 74 - 40219 Düsseldorf
HRB Düsseldorf 39841 - Geschäftsführer: Thilo Salmon, Tim Mois
Steuernummer: 106/5724/7147, Umsatzsteuer-ID: DE219349391
www.sipgate.de - www.sipgate.co.uk
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.
Hello,
I am proxying all RTP through RTPEngine. Everything works fine until about
5 seconds into the call, when rtpengine enters kernelization, after which
all RTP forwarding ceases. I've checked the required iptables entries, and
all looks good.
Here is a description of my environment:
# cat os-release
PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)"
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
VERSION_ID="11"
VERSION="11 (bullseye)"
VERSION_CODENAME=bullseye
ID=debian
HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"
SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"
# kamailio -v
version: kamailio 5.6.2 (x86_64/linux) 54a9c1
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_BLOCKLIST,
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: 54a9c1
compiled on 16:02:49 Dec 1 2022 with gcc 10.2.1
# rtpengine -v
Version: 11.1.1.3-1~bpo11+1
Michel Pelletier
Hi All
I have setup kamailio using dispatcher to proxy registrations from the UAC to asterisk
but when asterisk sends an incoming call it does not seem to keep the path header and therefore kamailio sends 404
is there anyway around this?
Thanks
Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email.
Hello,
Kamailio SIP Server v5.6.3 stable release is out.
This is a maintenance release of the latest stable branch, 5.6, that
includes fixes since the release of v5.6.2. There is no change to
database schema or configuration language structure that you have to do
on previous installations of v5.6.x. Deployments running previous v5.6.x
versions are strongly recommended to be upgraded to v5.6.3.
For more details about version 5.6.3 (including links and guidelines to
download the tarball or from GIT repository), visit:
* https://www.kamailio.org/w/2023/01/kamailio-v5-6-3-released/
RPM, Debian/Ubuntu packages will be available soon as well.
Many thanks to all contributing and using Kamailio!
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio World Conference - June 5-7, 2023 - www.kamailioworld.com
Hello,
I am considering to release Kamailio v5.5.6 soon, branch on branch 5.5,
likely on Thursday or Wednesday next week (Mar 2/3, 2023). This is the
usual heads up notification to see if anyone is aware of issues not yet
reported to bug tracker and if yes, do it as soon as possible to give
them a chance to be fixed.
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio World Conference - June 5-7, 2023 - www.kamailioworld.com
Kamailio Advanced Training - Online - March 27-30, 2023 - www.asipto.com
Hello guys,
We're seeing corner cases where the following happens:
On proxy-ws
- IP1:PORT1 connects via websocket from Client1
- Registration happens on an upstream kamailio
- for any reason, the TCP socket closes or times out.
- IP1:PORT1 (same IP:PORT combination) connects via websocket from Client2
- Registration happens on an upstream kamailio
Now a call comes in to Client1. Because the first connection was never
cleaned up, it is sent to the proxy-ws and the proxy will send it to the
IP1:PORT1 where Client2 is connected.
Short story, proxy-ws doesn't check the IP1:PORT1 where it is sending the
INVITE is the actual client it is supposed to be sending...
It seems that when a socket is closed, the mapping IP:PORT to Address
(i.e.: sip:d4f27e34@994f31243be9.invalid;transport=ws) doesn't seem to be
cleared... is this by design?
Thanks!
Regards,
David Villasmil
email: david.villasmil.work(a)gmail.com
phone: +34669448337
