sr-users March 2024

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

44 participants
49 discussions

SIP Trunk registration In Kamailio
by tanmoykarmakar10＠gmail.com 14 Oct '25

14 Oct '25

I want to register SIP Trunk directly in Kamailio. How can I register the SIP trunk in Kamailio. Please find the below sample SIP trunk details. Network IP 10.2.2.2 Subnet Mask 255.255.255.252 Customer IP 10.3.3.3 Gateway IP 10.1.1.1 SBCIP 10.4.4.4 Username 12345678 Password 1234 Please help me with configuration to register SIP trunk in kamailio.

4 4

Support for TLS server_name extension (aka SNI=server name indication)
by Barry Flanagan 04 Sep '25

04 Sep '25

Hi, Back in Kamailio 1.5, the release notes state: "support for TLS server_name extension (aka SNI=server name indication)" However, I cannot find any indication of this in the current TLS docs, and trying to set tls_server_name or server_name in tls.cfg fails with "unsupported option". Is this actually supported? Thanks. -Barry Flanagan

5 7

[4.2] how to send out BYE successfully to close a TCP/TLS connection which misses the connection ID?
by Jack Wang 02 Sep '25

02 Sep '25

For some reasons, My settings will cause kamailio to be restarted even if there were connections connected to it. And when one SIP client in a connection wanted to hangup the call with a WebRTC Client (SIP over websocket) after the proxy-restarting, local client was closed, however , the other side was not. >From the log below it seems that the connection missed. Jan 30 18:19:31 ./kamailio[27857]: WARNING: <core> [msg_translator.c:2777]: via_builder(): TCP/TLS connection (id: 0) for WebSocket could not be found Jan 30 18:19:31 ./kamailio[27857]: ERROR: tm [t_msgbuilder.c:1365]: assemble_via(): assemble_via: via building failed Jan 30 18:19:31 ./kamailio[27857]: ERROR: tm [t_msgbuilder.c:1545]: build_uac_req(): build_uac_req(): Error while assembling Via Jan 30 18:19:31 ./kamailio[27857]: ERROR: tm [uac.c:379]: t_uac_prepare(): t_uac: Error while building message So, Is it equivalent to connection ID missing? And is there any way to make Websocket found the connection? Btw, after proxy-restarting for seconds , I typed `sh kamctl stats` : websocket:ws_current_connections = 1 It showed that the WebRTC Client will re-connect automatically, So I think this connection could be found by proxy, Any suggestion? Thanks :)

2 3

[Serusers] Digest Authentication with Tenor DX
by Ashutosh Kumar 29 Apr '25

29 Apr '25

Hi, Does someone have any idea/experience with Quintum DX radius server's support for digest mode authentication. The Access-Request packets sent by SER are getting an error back. Guide. Regards, Ashutosh Kumar Chetu, Inc. Ph : 1(305) 402 6724 - Witin US Ph : 91 120 5323340 - Outside US Fax:1 (305) 832 5987 For more information, please visit http://www.chetu.com

2 1

apt-key deprecation
by tom＠tomlynn.com 11 Nov '24

11 Nov '24

When I look at the debian repositories maintained by the project, there are instructions to import the public key of the repository for apt using this command: wget -O http://deb.kamailio.org/kamailiodebkey.gpg | sudo apt-key add - which results in: Warning: apt-key is deprecated. Manage keyring files in trusted.gpg.d instead (see apt-key(8)). gpg: no valid OpenPGP data found. Is there an alternate method that can be posted in the repository that will get better results? Thank you, TL

5 5

Getting the name of an already set onreply_route
by Denys Pozniak 14 Oct '24

14 Oct '24

Hello! Is it possible to find out the name of the onreply_route that was set before? Something like this: t_on_reply("MANAGE_REPLY"); ... if ( t_is_set("onreply_route") ) { get_onreply_route_name(); ... } -- BR, Denys Pozniak

3 5

http_async_query on carrierfailureroute changes rd back to carrieroute primary
by Maharaja Azhagiah 07 Aug '24

07 Aug '24

Hi I am running kamailio 5.4 on debian I have carrierfailureroute configured incase of primary service provider fails. I also have Stirshaken configured to add Identity header on outbound calls. Issue is when call fail overs to carrierfailureroute, http_async_query changes $ru to the primary carrier From the debug logs, when primary carrier sends a 488 (primary carrier expects SIP TLS but my call is UDP - to test the failover scenario) 39(285) DEBUG: {1 18398 INVITE 8EmmsLqNuMRYBduMqFgX3w4JHAn4C2xn} tmx [t_var.c:561]: pv_get_tm_reply_code(): reply code is <488> 39(285) DEBUG: {1 18398 INVITE 8EmmsLqNuMRYBduMqFgX3w4JHAn4C2xn} carrierroute [cr_func.c:178]: set_next_domain_on_rule(): searching for matching routing rules39(285) INFO: {1 18398 INVITE 8EmmsLqNuMRYBduMqFgX3w4JHAn4C2xn} carrierroute [cr_func.c:197]: set_next_domain_on_rule(): next_domain is 47987 Carrier route rewrites the failover carrier 39(285) INFO: {1 18398 INVITE 8EmmsLqNuMRYBduMqFgX3w4JHAn4C2xn} carrierroute [cr_func.c:706]: cr_do_route(): uri 14371234567 was rewritten to sip:14371234567@sip.primaryprovider.com, carrier 1, domain 47987 Before http_async_query rd and ru are still the failover carrier 39(285) INFO: {1 18398 INVITE 8EmmsLqNuMRYBduMqFgX3w4JHAn4C2xn} <script>: [callid: 8EmmsLqNuMRYBduMqFgX3w4JHAn4C2xn] - [cfg:2976] - Debug testing ----- rd is sip.primaryprovider.com ----- ru is sip:14371234567@sip.primaryprovider.com 39(285) DEBUG: {1 18398 INVITE 8EmmsLqNuMRYBduMqFgX3w4JHAn4C2xn} http_async_client [async_http.c:469]: async_send_query(): transaction suspended [5261:1830449764] 39(285) DEBUG: {1 18398 INVITE 8EmmsLqNuMRYBduMqFgX3w4JHAn4C2xn} http_async_client [async_http.c:625]: async_push_query(): query sent [ https://authn-uat.ccid.neustar.biz/ccid/authn/v2/identity?apiKey=randomkey] (0x7fdcad097e60) to worker 1 However, when the route is being called after the http_async_query it changes to the primary one: 26(272) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1612]: t_lookup_ident_filter(): transaction found 26(272) DEBUG: http_async_client [async_http.c:235]: async_http_cb(): resuming transaction (5261:1830449764) 26(272) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1612]: t_lookup_ident_filter(): transaction found 26(272) INFO: <script>: [callid: 8EmmsLqNuMRYBduMqFgX3w4JHAn4C2xn] - [cfg:2995] - Debug testing ----- rd is 1.2.3.4 ----- ru is sip:14371234567@1.2.3.4:5061;transport=TLS Due to this, call keeps going to the primary and it fails if ( http_async_query(STIRSHAKEN_AS_URL, "AS_RESPONSE") == -1 ) { xlog("L_ERR ", "[cfg:$cfg(line)] Failed to connect AS service for token $fu -> $tu \n"); return; } route[AS_RESPONSE] { xlog("L_INFO", "[callid: $ci] - [cfg:$cfg(line)] - Debug testing ----- rd is $rd ----- ru is $ru\n"); if ($http_ok) { xlog("L_INFO", "[cfg:$cfg(line)] Resuming outbound call transaction for $fu -> $tu Received - $http_rb \n"); # Add identity and Date headers if (jansson_get("identity", $http_rb, "$var(identity)")) { insert_hf("Identity: $var(identity)\n", "Content-Length"); } if (jansson_get("date", $http_rb, "$var(date)")) { if ($hdr(Date) != $null){ remove_hf("Date"); } insert_hf("Date: $var(date)\n", "Identity"); } } else { xlog("L_ERR", "[cfg:$cfg(line)] Resuming outbound call transaction. Error - $http_err)\n"); } route(RELAY); exit; } Please help to understand why rd / ru changes to primary carrier. Regards, Maharaja Azhagiah

3 7

Via header force change protocol to TLS?
by Anthony Alba 30 May '24

30 May '24

I have kamailio behind a TLS termination proxy so the sockets are correctly deduced to be TCP. However the clients only talk TLS to the proxy and are confused when the top Via header added by Kamailio is TCP. Is there a way for Kamailio to forcibly pretend its protocol is TLS? Like advertised_address but "advertised_protocol" instead. (With pjsip testing: it has a flag use_tls which ignores TCP from Kamailio and continues to use the persistent TLS transport to proxy. Linphone fails because it tries to honor TCP in Via and is unable to establish TCP transport). BTW I am using t_relay_to_tcp so Kamailio will return traffic to the proxy as TCP even though the contact addresses specify transport=TLS.

4 10

q_malloc.c:520 WARNINGs
by Joel Serrano 20 May '24

20 May '24

Hi, Does anyone know what this WARNING means or how to fix it? 2024-03-09T00:39:15.406674-05:00 csbc03 csbc[33024]: WARNING: {1 1 INVITE CALL-ID} <core> [core/mem/q_malloc.c:520]: qm_free(): WARNING: free(0) called from dialplan: dp_db.c: pcre2_free(206) 2024-03-09T00:39:15.406823-05:00 csbc03 csbc[33024]: WARNING: {1 1 INVITE CALL-ID} <core> [core/mem/q_malloc.c:520]: qm_free(): WARNING: free(0) called from dialplan: dp_db.c: pcre2_free(206) 2024-03-09T00:39:15.406973-05:00 csbc03 csbc[33024]: WARNING: {1 1 INVITE CALL-ID} <core> [core/mem/q_malloc.c:520]: qm_free(): WARNING: free(0) called from dialplan: dp_db.c: pcre2_free(206) 2024-03-09T00:39:15.407089-05:00 csbc03 csbc[33024]: WARNING: {1 1 INVITE CALL-ID} <core> [core/mem/q_malloc.c:520]: qm_free(): WARNING: free(0) called from dialplan: dp_db.c: pcre2_free(206) 2024-03-09T00:39:15.407178-05:00 csbc03 csbc[33024]: WARNING: {1 1 INVITE CALL-ID} <core> [core/mem/q_malloc.c:520]: qm_free(): WARNING: free(0) called from dialplan: dp_db.c: pcre2_free(206) 2024-03-09T00:39:15.407278-05:00 csbc03 csbc[33024]: WARNING: {1 1 INVITE CALL-ID} <core> [core/mem/q_malloc.c:520]: qm_free(): WARNING: free(0) called from dialplan: dp_db.c: pcre2_free(206) 2024-03-09T00:39:15.407375-05:00 csbc03 csbc[33024]: WARNING: {1 1 INVITE CALL-ID} <core> [core/mem/q_malloc.c:520]: qm_free(): WARNING: free(0) called from dialplan: dp_db.c: pcre2_free(206) It happens after running dp_translate(). These are my settings: debug=L_DBG debug=L_NOTICE memdbg=L_INFO memlog=L_INFO corelog=L_ERR mem_summary=12 log_stderror=no log_facility=LOG_LOCAL0 log_name="csbc" log_prefix="{$mt $hdr(CSeq) $ci} " mem_join=1 Any ideas? Thanks, Joel.

2 5

low performance with no apparent reason
by Sergio Charrua 05 Apr '24

05 Apr '24

Hi all! I have been doing some performance tests with Kamailio 5.7.4 and SIPp. The infrastructure is as follows:3 VMs running on VMWare ESXi running: UAC on 10.20.0.1 with SIPP-> Kamailio on 10.20.0.5 -> UAS on 10.20.0.3 The Kamailio VM has 6 dedicated vCPU of type Intel(R) Xeon(R) Silver 4216 CPU @ 2.10GHz and, 2 NICs and 4Gb RAM and MariaDB 10.6 as DB Backend., all running on a HP G380 host with a gazillion CPUs and a googol disk space! I currently have 3 scripts: - script #1 stateful with RTJson and simulating requests to routing engine and accounting - script #2 stateful but with just a simple routing to UAS, no rules, no DB, - script #3 stateless with a forward to UAS With script #3 I can go up to 2000CPS without issues with CPU at 37%! Above that value, I get retransmissions everywhere. On both scripts #1 and #2, the limit is 330CPS max after which I get a lot of retransmissions, while CPU/Core usage on Kamailio server stays below 10%. So I do not expect this to be a CPU issue. I could not understand why such (low) results, so I followed this article found at https://www.kamailio.org/docs/openser-performance-tests/#tm-tests-c <https://www.kamailio.org/docs/openser-performance-tests/#tm-tests-c> and created exact same scenarios, with kamailio script and SIPP templates available on the article, hoping for better results. But I get the same results: between 300 and 330CPS which is far, very far from the 7000CPS found in the article! I understand that I'm using VMs and probably the tests made for the article, which is pretty old already, were made on physical servers. Still, I would not expect 95% of lower performance! Any clue what could be the issue? I suspect NICs, but.... Any tips anyone could share? Thanks in advance! *Sérgio Charrua*

7 31

2026

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 March 2024