sr-users January 2025

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

40 participants
39 discussions

How to access registration contact user agent string in branch route after location lookup?
by Benoit Panizzon 24 Jan '25

24 Jan '25

Hi List I have some CPE which require special handling like removing 100rel and update from the supported methods because they misbehave. Previously, I was using reg_fetch_contacts and then appending the branches manually and stacking the UA in an AVP. With the branch index this allowed me to get the AVP containing the UA to which the call was branched in the branch route and perform filtering of methods based on UA, but it was complicated. Now I use the intended function lookup_to_dset() but now I miss how to access the register contact UA from within a branch route. Is there an intended way to access that information? Mit freundlichen Grüssen -Benoît Panizzon- -- 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 ______________________________________________________

3 7

Use local_identity or custom data to set callerID
by matu lopi 23 Jan '25

23 Jan '25

Hi team, Is it possible to use either local_identity or custom data properties to define the CallerID during the RTCSession lifecycle? Thank you.

2 1

Issue with ACK on INVITE
by Barry Flanagan 23 Jan '25

23 Jan '25

Hi folks, Trying to hook up a new endpoint but am having an issue. Kamailio is in front of an Asterisk box. They send an INVITE, we send 100, then 200 OK. However, when they send their ACK, the RURI is not set to the Contact of the 200, instead it is<number>@<proxy ip>. This causes the ACK to get routed to the proxy itself and the call fails. 82.160.190.100:5060 = Kamailio IP Port 198.201.240.242:5080 = Asterisk IP/Port 182.33.174.10:5060 = Provider endpoint The far endpoint say they cannot fix the RURI - should I be able to handle this ACK below? My understanding is the ACK's RURI should be the Contact of the 200 OK. 200 OK sent from us to the Provider (Contact shows correct URI) ========================================================= 2025/01/15 17:14:49.470634 82.160.190.100:5060 -> 182.33.174.10:5060 SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 182.33.174.10;branch=z9hG4bKefc7.ad07f2d3.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 182.33.174.39:5060;received=182.33.174.39;branch=z9hG4bK5bbf9591;rport=5060 Record-Route: <sip:1800715080@82.160.190.100:5061;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=as0b42eef3;did=f2e.ade2;nat=yes> Record-Route: <sip:1800715080@82.160.190.100;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=as0b42eef3;did=f2e.ade2;nat=yes> Record-Route: <sip:182.33.174.10;lr;ftag=as0b42eef3> From: "0737965510" <sip:0737966610@182.33.174.39>;tag=as0b42eef3 To: <sip:1800715080@82.160.190.100>;tag=as4133584e Call-ID: 480dc17b3f88516f364778dc4b2528da@182.33.174.39:5060 CSeq: 102 INVITE Server: Asterisk PBX 18.9.0 Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, INFO, PUBLISH, MESSAGE Supported: replaces *Contact: <sip:1800715080@198.201.240.242:5080>* Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: 314 , ACK Reply from Provider to Us (RURI points to Kamailio ip:port now =========================================================== 2025/01/15 17:14:49.478119 182.33.174.10:5060 -> 82.160.190.100:5060 *ACK sip:1800715080@82.160.190.100:5060 *SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 182.33.174.10;branch=z9hG4bKefc7.ad07f2d3.2 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 182.33.174.39:5060;received=182.33.174.39;branch=z9hG4bK55656469;rport=5060 Route: <sip:1800715080@82.160.190.100;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=as0b42eef3;did=f2e.ade2;nat=yes>,sip:1800715080@82.160.190.100:5061;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=as0b42eef3;did=f2e.ade2;nat=yes> Max-Forwards: 69 From: "0737965510" <sip:0737966610@182.33.174.39>;tag=as0b42eef3 To: <sip:1800715080@82.160.190.100>;tag=as4133584e Contact: <sip:0737965510@182.33.174.39:5060> Call-ID: 480dc17b3f88516f364778dc4b2528da@182.33.174.39:5060 CSeq: 102 ACK Thanks -Barry

5 5

Kamailio v5.8.5 Released
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 23 Jan '25

23 Jan '25

Hello, Kamailio SIP Server v5.8.5 stable release is out. This is a maintenance release of the latest stable branch, 5.8, that includes fixes since the release of v5.8.4. There is no change to database schema or configuration language structure that you have to do on previous installations of v5.8.x. Deployments running previous v5.8.x versions are strongly recommended to be upgraded to v5.8.5. For more details about version 5.8.5 (including links and guidelines to download the tarball or from GIT repository), visit: * https://www.kamailio.org/w/2025/01/kamailio-v5-8-5-released/ RPM, Debian/Ubuntu packages will be available soon as well. Many thanks to all contributing and using Kamailio! Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla (@ asipto.com) twitter.com/miconda -- linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Consultancy, Training and Development Services -- asipto.com Kamailio World Conference, May 12-13, 2025, Berlin -- kamailioworld.com

1 0

Getting headers from xhttp/websocket
by Barry Flanagan 23 Jan '25

23 Jan '25

Hi, I need to be able to pull in a header provided by a webrtc endpoint so I can use it in my request_route. I understand that I will need to use shm/htable to make it visible but I am unable to get the xhttp header using $header(x-p-push), or any header by name. In my event_route[xhttp:request] I have the following: if ($hdr(Upgrade) =~ "websocket" && $hdr(Connection) =~ "Upgrade" && $rm =~ "GET") { .... xlog("L_INFO", "BF x-p-push header is $hdr(x-p-push) Contact is $hdr(Contact)\n"); } The log shows both x-p-push and Contact header as null. sipdump shows the headers present in the request. Am I missing something? Running Kamailio 5.8.4 Thanks -Barry

3 3

Development is open for future release of v6.1.x series
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 22 Jan '25

22 Jan '25

Hello, the branch 6.0 was created, therefore the master branch is open for adding new features, to be part of future release series v6.1.x. Any bug fix committed to master that applies to 6.0.x or older stable branches should be backported as usual with "git cherry-pick -x ..." to appropriate branches like 6.0 or 5.8. Expect that v6.0.0 will be released in a few weeks from now. Based on the workflow used during the past years, the next future release v6.1.0 should be out after another 8-10 months of development, plus 1-2 months of testing, so sometime during the last part of 2025 or the beginning of 2026. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla (@ asipto.com) twitter.com/miconda -- linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Consultancy, Training and Development Services -- asipto.com Kamailio World Conference, May 12-13, 2025, Berlin -- kamailioworld.com

1 0

Branch 6.0 has been created
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 22 Jan '25

22 Jan '25

Hello, the branch 6.0 has been created, to be used for releasing v6.0.x series. To check out this branch, the following commands can be used: git clone https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio kamailio-6.0 cd kamailio-6.0 git checkout -b 6.0 origin/6.0 Pushing commits in this branch: git push origin 6.0:6.0 Note that 6.0 is an official stable branch, so only bug fixes, missing kemi exports (discuss on sr-dev if not sure) or improvements to documentation or helper tools can be pushed to this branch. As usual, if there is a bug fixed, commit and push first to master branch and then cherry pick to 6.0 branch: git cherry-pick -x COMMITID In few weeks, the first release from branch 6.0 will be out, respectively Kamailio v6.0.0. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla (@ asipto.com) twitter.com/miconda -- linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Consultancy, Training and Development Services -- asipto.com

1 0

Not able to get the $TV(un) inside xhttp module
by kaseenadh111＠gmail.com 22 Jan '25

22 Jan '25

Hi, I am running Kamailio 5.7.* RHEL I need to log the latency of each XHTTP request (milli or microseconds precision) so I tried using $TV(un) which always gives a 0 value. Can we access $TV(un) under XHTTP routes? event_route[xhttp:request] { $var(tv_http_req_start_time) = $TV(un); xlog("L_INFO", "$$var(tv_http_req_start_time)= $var(tv_http_req_start_time) and actual $$TV(un)= $TV(un)"); .... } Output: Jan 22 16:18:20 VM-123************ kamailio[346535]: INFO: <script>: $var(tv_http_req_start_time)= 0 and actual $TV(un)= 0 $TS - I have tried this, it gives the Unix in seconds precision but I want milliseconds precision. Thanks Kasee

1 0

Re: [sr-dev] Re: Branching 6.0 series
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 22 Jan '25

22 Jan '25

Hello, later today, in a few hours, I am going to create the branch 6.0. More details will be provided once it has been created. Cheers, Daniel On 20.01.25 08:25, Daniel-Constantin Mierla via sr-dev wrote: > Hello, > > I think we should branch it on Wednesday, Jan 22, 2025, no matter on > what stage we are with cmake support. The old-Makefiles should be kept > anyhow (as they are or in a special folder with an easy way to recover > them), because there are many bits and pieces that can be discovered > later when more users. > > Because there were no many bugs reported to the C code specific to 6.0, > we can aim releasing on January 29, 2025, with old-Makefile still to be > used for tasks that are not yet covered by cmake. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > On 15.01.25 11:16, Henning Westerholt via sr-dev wrote: >> Hello, >> >> yes, Xenofon is also waiting for a final reply from Sergey for the RPM packaging if now all is fine (was discussed as part of PR #4085). >> >> Cheers, >> >> Henning >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Victor Seva via sr-dev <sr-dev(a)lists.kamailio.org> >>> Sent: Mittwoch, 15. Januar 2025 10:59 >>> To: sr-dev(a)lists.kamailio.org >>> Cc: Victor Seva <linuxmaniac(a)torreviejawireless.org> >>> Subject: [sr-dev] Re: Branching 6.0 series >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> please postpone. I didn't have time finalize the test of cmake builds on debian >>> packaging yet. >>> >>> On 15/1/25 7:18, Daniel-Constantin Mierla via sr-dev wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> creating git branch 6.0 was planned for today and I wonder if it shall >>>> be done latter during the evening or it would be preferred to be >>>> postponed for two days or so, till end of the week/Friday, as I >>>> noticed yesterday some new work being done to cmake files for FreeBSD >>>> and maybe new commits are still coming. >>>> >>>> Of course, there is also the option to create the branch and then the >>>> new commits backported, but maybe postponing makes everything more >>>> convenient. >>>> >>>> In short, if anyone feels that postponing a bit creating the branch >>>> 6.0 simplifies their current work, let us know. If nobody ask for >>>> postponing, the branch will be created later towards the end of today. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Daniel >>> -- >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Victor Seva | >>> | ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ linuxmaniac(a)torreviejawireless.org | >>> | ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀PGP: 8F19 CADC D42A 42D4 5563 730C 51A0 9B18 CF5A >>> 5068 | >>> | ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀ Debian Developer | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> _______________________________________________ >> Kamailio - Development Mailing List -- sr-dev(a)lists.kamailio.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to sr-dev-leave(a)lists.kamailio.org >> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla (@ asipto.com) > twitter.com/miconda -- linkedin.com/in/miconda > Kamailio Consultancy, Training and Development Services -- asipto.com > > _______________________________________________ > Kamailio - Development Mailing List -- sr-dev(a)lists.kamailio.org > To unsubscribe send an email to sr-dev-leave(a)lists.kamailio.org > Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla (@ asipto.com) twitter.com/miconda -- linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Consultancy, Training and Development Services -- asipto.com

2 1

Multi-line Via: rport added incorrectly
by James Browne 22 Jan '25

22 Jan '25

Hi I see that when kamailio adds rport to the Via header field of a request that has two Via values on the same line (comma-separated, of course), it adds the rport (and received) to the wrong value. I have this test kamailio.cfg for demonstration. children=1 loadmodule "sl" loadmodule "textops" loadmodule "nathelper" request_route { force_rport(); sl_send_reply(200, "OK"); } I send this OPTIONS (truncated) and get this response (truncated). The rport should be on the first Via value, not the second. OPTIONS sip:server SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 3.9.4.2:5060;branch=z9hG4bK503983089,SIP/2.0/UDP 1.3.4.1:5060;branch=z9hG4bK53805983059 From: <sip:client>;tag=LeonhardEuler To: <sip:server> SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 3.9.4.2:5060;branch=z9hG4bK503983089,SIP/2.0/UDP 1.3.4.1:5060;branch=z9hG4bK53805983059;rport=53805;received=127.0.0.1 From: <sip:client>;tag=LeonhardEuler To: <sip:server>;tag=9dd61ff61e802d8e2bef5f14621ef3c2.49678e65 Server: kamailio (6.0.0-pre0 (x86_64/linux)) I've tested this with the latest commit (c994fb8) from kamailio. I can't think how this can be anything other than a bug. Should I log a bug report for this? James

2 4

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 January 2025