sr-users May 2024

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

50 participants
59 discussions

by Jeff Brower

Rtpengine support- I am re-posting again, as I noticed on the SR-USERs web page no HTML or inline images are showing (https://lists.kamailio.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/sr-users@lists.kamailio…). The Wireshark screencap that demonstrates the issue is uploaded at: https://www.signalogic.com/images/rtpengine_wireshark_capture_timestamp_jum… all other info remains the same. Thanks, Jeff ----- Forwarded message from Jeff Brower <jbrower(a)signalogic.com> ----- Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 17:10:10 +0000 From: Jeff Brower <jbrower(a)signalogic.com> Subject: Fwd: [SR-Users] rtpengine timestamp jumps To: sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org Reposting this. If there is an issue with HTML format and/or wireshark screen cap and I need to upload that separately somewhere else, please let me know. Thanks. -Jeff ----- Forwarded message from Jeff Brower <jbrower(a)signalogic.com> ----- Date: Thu, 09 May 2024 05:32:27 +0000 From: Jeff Brower <jbrower(a)signalogic.com> Subject: [SR-Users] rtpengine timestamp jumps To: sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org Hi rtpengine experts, We have some customers processing long multi-party call pcaps using mediaMin who are reporting large amounts of packets with timestamp jumps but no packet loss (for instance 10% of packets over a 1 hr 45 min call). For example, in the Wireshark excerpt shown below, packets 6 and 8 sent by rtpengine show a timestamp increment of 640, but sequence number increment of 1: [screencap link at https://www.signalogic.com/images/wireshark_capture_timestamp_jump.png] In the mediaMin output packet log we typically see sections similar to: : : Seq num 98584 timestamp = 3902252372, rtp pyld len = 33 media-R Seq num 98585 timestamp = 3902252692, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98586 timestamp = 3902253012, rtp pyld len = 33 media-R Seq num 98587 timestamp = 3902253332, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98588 timestamp = 3902253652, rtp pyld len = 33 media-R Seq num 98589 timestamp = 3902253972, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98590 timestamp = 3902254292, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98591 timestamp = 3902254612, rtp pyld len = 33 media-R Seq num 98592 timestamp = 3902254932, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98593 timestamp = 3902255252, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98594 timestamp = 3902255572, rtp pyld len = 33 media-R Seq num 98595 timestamp = 3902255892, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98596 timestamp = 3902256212, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98597 timestamp = 3902256532, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98598 timestamp = 3902256852, rtp pyld len = 33 media-R Seq num 98599 timestamp = 3902257172, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98600 timestamp = 3902257492, rtp pyld len = 33 media-R Seq num 98601 timestamp = 3902257812, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98602 timestamp = 3902258132, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98603 timestamp = 3902258452, rtp pyld len = 33 media Seq num 98604 timestamp = 3902258772, rtp pyld len = 33 media-R Seq num 98605 timestamp = 3902259092, rtp pyld len = 33 media : : where media-R packets are timestamp gap repairs (i.e. frame loss concealment). The behavior tends to be bursty, but once it gets going it goes for a while and seems relatively consistent. Is this expected behavior for rtpengine ? If so is rptengine in turn dealing with some type of "slow packet rate" issue from a remote sender ? Thanks, Jeff ----- End forwarded message ----- ----- End forwarded message -----

4 months, 3 weeks

core children setting

by Alexis Fidalgo

Hello all, im not clear on the children setting, currently we’re listening in a single UDP port, i do understand that children are how many forks per listener ip:port, but i have this question, is this value tied on how many requests are received? In our case every requests takes an average of 80ms to be processed (there are a few external queries executed per request), so, example which value for children should i use if i have 200req/s, 300, 400? Right now im using 16 but i can see some cpu peaks in high traffic hours. thanks

4 months, 3 weeks

"Contact does not exist in PCSCF usrloc" error in log

by Shantanu K Roy

Hello, We are trying to integrate Kamailio as the IMS server with our 5G core emulator by following the steps listed out at https://open5gs.org/open5gs/docs/tutorial/02-VoLTE-setup/. In our case, we have our own 5G core emulator instead of the Open5GS core. We are using sipp scripts to generate the SIP calls. The PCRF component of the 5G core is emulated by us and is capable of handling Diamater calls from Kamailio over the Rx interface. We have got the setup working to the point where the SIP Register calls are landing on the PCSCF which in turn is sending out AA Requests to PCRF and the PCRF is responding. However there is an internal error in the Kamailio log "4(3682133) ERROR: ims_qos [ims_qos_mod.c:1305]: w_rx_aar_register(): This contact does not exist in PCSCF usrloc - error in cfg file" Please help us in identifying if we are missing anything in the Kamailio set up. The packet capture and syslog excerpts from the VM where Kamailio is running are attached; here we are trying to perform SIP Registration for three SIP endpoints 001010123456791, 001010123456792 and 001010123456793. If there is any additional information required, please let us know. Regards, Shantanu

4 months, 3 weeks

VoLTE/IMS third party registration issues

by ruben.iniguez＠vodafone.com

Checking Kamailio in a VoLTE environment we are finding issues to make it work. First issues arise when getting AS to extract the required info from third party registration, primarily IMPUs. Third party registration is sent to AS with IMPI in To header, preventing the AS from extracting the IMPU from the most obvious place, the To header, according to 3GPP 24.229: "Notification of Application Servers about registration status [...] the To header field, which shall contain a non-barred public user identity belonging to the service profile of the processed Filter Criteria. It may be either a public user identity as contained in the REGISTER request received from the UE or one of the implicitly registered public user identities in the service profile, as configured by the operator;" On the other hand, the third party registration can only embed in its body either the original request or the original response but not both (notice mutually exclusive "else if" statements in third_party_reg.c). Both are needed to extract Feature-Caps (from original request) and IMPUs (for instance from P-Associated-URI in original response). Therefore to extract that info the AS should subscribe to the reg info in S-CSCF, but such SUBSCRIBE is rejected with 403. From Registrar IMS SCSCF documenation it looks like this is not supported: "This function checks to see that a SUBSCRIBE request is authorised to subscribe to the particular identity. Only 3 entities can subscribe: The user agent to its own state The P-CSCF specified in the path header for that user Application Server (AS) not yet implemented" Therefore question to the community is how these limitations are overcome in existing VoLTE deployments with Kamailio? Any advice?

4 months, 3 weeks

Kamailio IPSec module

by H Yavari

Hi all, I was reviewing the `ims_ipsec_pcscf` code and noticed that this module creates a pool of sockets using different ports (ipsec_max_connections). I'm unclear on the necessity of this approach. Can't we simply create one server listener and one client listener to handle all UE connections? If this is feasible, is there still a need to create the pool at startup? I'm curious if this is due to an architectural limitation or if the IPSec module can be modified to replace the current implementation with a more efficient one. Thank you for your insights. Best regards,Hossein

4 months, 3 weeks

S-CSCF SiFC support

by ruben.iniguez＠vodafone.com

Hello In the context of an IMS deployment, does anybody know if Shared iFC mechanism is supported in Kamailio? I don't see configuration options for it, and just wanted to confirm if only regular iFCs (residing on HSS) are supported. Thank you

4 months, 4 weeks

Assistance Required for VoNR Setup with Version 5.8.1

by venkateshcoff＠gmail.com

Hi, I am trying to set up VoNR with version 5.8.1, but I cannot find the configuration information and documentation anywhere. Has anyone tested a VoNR call? Thanks.

4 months, 4 weeks

usrloc: keepalives not being sent to UDP endpoints for a very long time

by luke＠primevox.net

We've noticed an issue with UDP endpoints and the usrloc module not sending keepalive packets to them for a long time. Eventually, usrloc will begin doing it, but sometimes it's anywhere between 10 minutes and multiple hours before the endpoint starts receiving an OPTIONS packet. TCP and TLS endpoints do not have this issue - they being receiving OPTIONS after registration + ka_timeout elapsed. Has anyone else seen this? It can be very easily seen with a pcap on a device registering via UDP.

4 months, 4 weeks

A question about Db_flatstore Module in Kamailio

by فرزانه سلطان زاده

Hi, Hope to find you well, I have a question about the 'db_flatstore' module in Kamailio. Here's my script for log rotation: for f in acc_cdrs_*.log; do mv -- "$f" "${f%.log}.temp" done docker exec -it pcscf kamcmd flatstore.k_rotate rm *.temp I want to know if the kamcmd command is blocking and the files can be removed after that or if I should wait for it to be done before removing the renamed files. Regards, Farzaneh

5 months

Kamailio multidomain IMS

by Valentin Christoph

Dear IMS enthusiasts :-) Has anyone experience with Kamailio IMS (CSCF) setups, where users with different domain names can be registered at one and the same S-CSCF? Is this feasible at all? I mean one IMS for users <user>@ims1.example.com, <user>@ims2.example.com, <user>@ims3.example.com,........ in one and the same S-CSCF, I-CSCF, P-CSCF. Thanks, Christoph

5 months

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 May 2024