sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

18 participants
37469 discussions

[Kamailio-Users] LDAP and TLS
by Olle E. Johansson 07 Oct '09

07 Oct '09

Greetings, fellow Kamailians! Looking at the LDAP module for Kamailio, I see that we can use LDAPS: and get TLS connections. But where are the SSL configurations so I can use a client cert, or verify the server cert? /O

1 0

[Kamailio-Users] use as registrar only server
by Rajesh 07 Oct '09

07 Oct '09

I would like to know what all can be done using openser/kamailio as a registrar server alone. i.e. in the real world scenario how does openser can be useful as a registrar sever alone.I would like to make myself clear by pointing to the below example. i can integrate openser and asterisk and make openser as a registrar (only)server and can make use of asterisk for call functionality purposes.. Similarly, i would like to know where openser fits in (openser should only be used as a registrar server again). Your guidance is greatly appreciated. -- Regards, Rajesh

1 0

[Kamailio-Users] How can I access dialog attributes from within timeout route?
by Nathan Angelacos 07 Oct '09

07 Oct '09

Hi, In kamailio 1.5.2-notls, I'm trying to get the CallID of a dialog that has timed out: if (is_method( "INVITE" ) && !has_totag()) { $dlg_ctx(timeout_route) = 21; } ... route[21] { xlog ("L_WARN", "Dead dialog: $dlg(callid)"); exit; } However, syslog says: daemon.warn /usr/sbin/kamailio[6578]: Dead Dialog: <null> daemon.warn /usr/sbin/kamailio[6578]: WARNING:dialog:dlg_ontimeout: timeout for dlg with CallID \ '8b2eb5e3-20493c20-14e681d(a)192.168.1.1' and tags '87F489DA-922DF157' '2XrwB5OcEJ2zQvyiTUIh-l2Zd1wjL51M' dlg_handlers.c leads me to believe that the context is loaded before calling the route(21), and the dialog timeout handler is nice enough to report it in syslog just after my script fails. Am I missing something fundamental, or is this just not possible? Thanks!

2 8

[Serusers] SER and RTPproxy
by Jeff Russell 06 Oct '09

06 Oct '09

I Think I have thing configured correctly and yet I can not make things work correctly. This is what I am do I have SER on an internal (10.1.1.x) IP address I have RTPproxy on a different machine with a public IP address 206.75.15.x I am routing the call out over our firewall and things 'almost' work. SER sets up the call using the RTPproxy to set up the ports for the RTP stream, and the RTP stream is returned from the far end to the public IP address, however non of the RTP traffic is sent to the internal address, I am guessing it is waiting for an rtp stream from the internal address but neither SER nor the ip-phone send anything or even seem to know about the RTPproxy. Can anyone offer ANY suggestions as to how to direct the internal RTP stream to the RTPproxy address? Many thanks, Jeffr

2 2

Re: [Serusers] SER and RTPproxy
by Edson - Lists 06 Oct '09

06 Oct '09

Please, don't forget to copy the list... _this_ is a list... ;) Edson. Jeff Russell escreveu: > I think this is where the error is: > > 0(60402) ERROR: extract_body: message body has length zero > 0(60402) ERROR: force_rtp_proxy2: can't extract body from the message > > ideas? > > > > On 2009-10-06, at 11:08 AM, Edson - Lists wrote: > >> I would suggest You to use NGREP and sniff both legs of the >> communication flow... >> >> See what SER receives and responds, what's on the SDP body and look at >> syslog to understand what RTPproxy is doing. Maybe also take a look on >> what the internal client is sending and receiving. >> >> It should give You some hints. >> >> Edson. >> >> Jeff Russell escreveu: >>> I Think I have thing configured correctly and yet I can not make >>> things work correctly. >>> This is what I am do >>> I have SER on an internal (10.1.1.x) IP address >>> I have RTPproxy on a different machine with a public IP address >>> 206.75.15.x >>> I am routing the call out over our firewall and things 'almost' work. >>> SER sets up the call using the RTPproxy to set up the ports for the >>> RTP stream, and the RTP stream is returned from the far end to the >>> public IP address, however non of the RTP traffic is sent to the >>> internal address, I am guessing it is waiting for an rtp stream from >>> the internal address but neither SER nor the ip-phone send anything >>> or even seem to know about the RTPproxy. >>> Can anyone offer ANY suggestions as to how to direct the internal RTP >>> stream to the RTPproxy address? >>> Many thanks, >>> Jeffr >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Serusers mailing list >>> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org >>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers > >

1 0

[Kamailio-Users] use of kamailo as a registrar (only)server
by Rajesh 06 Oct '09

06 Oct '09

I could implement openser as a registrar(only) server .Thanks to the team openser for the timely help.I would like to know what all can be done using openser/kamailio as a registrar server alone. i.e. in the real world scenario how does openser can be useful as a registrar sever alone.I would like to make myself clear by pointing to the below example. i can integrate openser and asterisk and make openser as a registrar (only)server and can make use of asterisk for call functionality purposes.. Similarly, i would like to know where openser fits in (openser should only be used as a registrar server again). Your responses can speed up my research work.. > > Saúl Ibarra wrote: > > You are doing save_location before authentication. You should first > challenge the REGISTER for authentication and then do save_location. > > 2009/10/6, Rajesh <Rajesh.sreedharan(a)siptech.com>: > > > Dear All, > I would like my kamailio server to act (only) as a > Registrar server. I have configured my kamilio for performing > authentication successfully, but this time i find that authentication is > not being done.Your views on my cfg is greatly appreciated. > > # ------------------ module loading ---------------------------------- > debug=3 > log_stderror=yes > mpath="/usr/local/lib/kamailio/modules/" > > loadmodule "db_mysql.so" > loadmodule "mi_fifo.so" > loadmodule "sl.so" > loadmodule "pv.so" > loadmodule "usrloc.so" > loadmodule "registrar.so" > loadmodule "textops.so" > loadmodule "uri_db.so" > > loadmodule "auth.so" > loadmodule "auth_db.so" > > port=5060 > # ----------------- setting module-specific parameters --------------- > > > # ----- mi_fifo params ----- > modparam("mi_fifo", "fifo_name", "/tmp/kamailio_fifo") > > > # ----- auth_db params ----- > /* uncomment the following lines if you want to enable the DB based > authentication */ > modparam("auth_db", "calculate_ha1", yes) > modparam("auth_db", "password_column", "password") > modparam("auth_db", "db_url","mysql://openser:openserrw@localhost/openser") > modparam("auth_db", "load_credentials", "") > > # -- usrloc params -- > > modparam("usrloc", "db_url", > "mysql://openser:openserrw@192.168.64.75/openser") > > > modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 3) > > # ------------------------- request routing logic ------------------- > > # main routing logic > > route{ > > # initial sanity checks -- too long messages > if (msg:len >= 2048 ) { > sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); > exit; > }; > > if (!uri==myself) { > sl_send_reply("400", "Bad destination, only register > messages destined for this server are accepted"); > exit; > }; > > # the only valid message for the registrar is the register message > # other messages are answered with an error message > if (uri==myself) { > > if (method=="REGISTER") { > > sl_send_reply("100", "Trying"); > > if(!save("location")) { > sl_reply_error(); > }; > exit; > } else { > sl_send_reply("403", "Forbidden"); > exit; > }; > }; > > # Authentication route > > > if (is_method("REGISTER")) > { > # authenticate the REGISTER requests (uncomment to enable auth) > if (!www_authorize("192.168.64.75", "subscriber")) > { > www_challenge("192.168.64.75", "0"); > exit; > } > ###the following lines are uncommented > if ($au!=$tU) > { > sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); > exit; > } > } > else > { > # authenticate if from local subscriber (uncomment to enable auth) > if (from_uri==myself) > { > if (!proxy_authorize("", "subscriber")) > { > proxy_challenge("", "0"); > exit; > } > if (is_method("PUBLISH")) > { > if ($au!=$tU) { > sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); > exit; > } > } else { > if ($au!=$fU) { > sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); > exit; > } > } > > consume_credentials(); > # caller authenticated > } > } > return; > } > > > > -- > Regards, > Rajesh >

1 0

Re: [Kamailio-Users] kamailio as registrar server
by Saúl Ibarra 06 Oct '09

06 Oct '09

This should have gone to the list... :) On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Rajesh <Rajesh.sreedharan(a)siptech.com> wrote: > I could implement openser as a registrar(only) server .Thanks to the team > openser for the timely help.I would like to know what all can be done using > openser/kamailio as a registrar server alone. i.e. in the real world > scenario how does openser can be useful as a registrar sever alone.I would > like to make myself clear by pointing to the below example. i can integrate > openser and asterisk and make openser as a registrar (only)server and can > make use of asterisk for call functionality purposes.. Similarly, i would > like to know where openser fits in (openser should only be used as a > registrar server again). > Your responses can speed up my research work.. > > > Saúl Ibarra wrote: > > You are doing save_location before authentication. You should first > challenge the REGISTER for authentication and then do save_location. > > 2009/10/6, Rajesh <Rajesh.sreedharan(a)siptech.com>: > > > Dear All, > I would like my kamailio server to act (only) as a > Registrar server. I have configured my kamilio for performing > authentication successfully, but this time i find that authentication is > not being done.Your views on my cfg is greatly appreciated. > > # ------------------ module loading ---------------------------------- > debug=3 > log_stderror=yes > mpath="/usr/local/lib/kamailio/modules/" > > loadmodule "db_mysql.so" > loadmodule "mi_fifo.so" > loadmodule "sl.so" > loadmodule "pv.so" > loadmodule "usrloc.so" > loadmodule "registrar.so" > loadmodule "textops.so" > loadmodule "uri_db.so" > > loadmodule "auth.so" > loadmodule "auth_db.so" > > port=5060 > # ----------------- setting module-specific parameters --------------- > > > # ----- mi_fifo params ----- > modparam("mi_fifo", "fifo_name", "/tmp/kamailio_fifo") > > > # ----- auth_db params ----- > /* uncomment the following lines if you want to enable the DB based > authentication */ > modparam("auth_db", "calculate_ha1", yes) > modparam("auth_db", "password_column", "password") > modparam("auth_db", "db_url","mysql://openser:openserrw@localhost/openser") > modparam("auth_db", "load_credentials", "") > > # -- usrloc params -- > > modparam("usrloc", "db_url", > "mysql://openser:openserrw@192.168.64.75/openser") > > > modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 3) > > # ------------------------- request routing logic ------------------- > > # main routing logic > > route{ > > # initial sanity checks -- too long messages > if (msg:len >= 2048 ) { > sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); > exit; > }; > > if (!uri==myself) { > sl_send_reply("400", "Bad destination, only register > messages destined for this server are accepted"); > exit; > }; > > # the only valid message for the registrar is the register message > # other messages are answered with an error message > if (uri==myself) { > > if (method=="REGISTER") { > > sl_send_reply("100", "Trying"); > > if(!save("location")) { > sl_reply_error(); > }; > exit; > } else { > sl_send_reply("403", "Forbidden"); > exit; > }; > }; > > # Authentication route > > > if (is_method("REGISTER")) > { > # authenticate the REGISTER requests (uncomment to enable auth) > if (!www_authorize("192.168.64.75", "subscriber")) > { > www_challenge("192.168.64.75", "0"); > exit; > } > ###the following lines are uncommented > if ($au!=$tU) > { > sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); > exit; > } > } > else > { > # authenticate if from local subscriber (uncomment to enable auth) > if (from_uri==myself) > { > if (!proxy_authorize("", "subscriber")) > { > proxy_challenge("", "0"); > exit; > } > if (is_method("PUBLISH")) > { > if ($au!=$tU) { > sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); > exit; > } > } else { > if ($au!=$fU) { > sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); > exit; > } > } > > consume_credentials(); > # caller authenticated > } > } > return; > } > > > > -- > Regards, > Rajesh > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Rajesh -- /Saúl http://www.saghul.net | http://www.sipdoc.net

1 0

Re: [Kamailio-Users] fs_index.cxx:1: error: bad value (x86_64) for-march (mtune)= switch
by Iñaki Baz Castillo 06 Oct '09

06 Oct '09

¿?¿? El Lunes, 5 de Octubre de 2009, ?? escribió: > vendor_id : AuthenticAMD > cpu family : 16 > model : 2 > model name : Quad-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 2350 > stepping : 2 > cpu MHz : 2010.303 > cache size : 512 KB > physical id : 1 > siblings : 4 > core id : 2 > cpu cores : 4 > fpu : yes > fpu_exception : yes > cpuid level : 5 > wp : yes > flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca > cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt > pdpe1gb rdtscp lm 3dnowext 3dnow pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm > cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy altmovcr8 abm sse4a misalignsse > 3dnowprefetch osvw bogomips : 4020.69 > TLB size : 1104 4K pages > clflush size : 64 > cache_alignment : 64 > address sizes : 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual > power management: ts ttp tm stc 100mhzsteps hwpstate <NULL> > > > above is the info of the CPU. > > ************************************************************* > L Xue > Building 102, Room 102 > Department of Nuclear Physics > Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, CAS > No. 2019, JiaLuo Roud > Shanghai, 201800 > P. R. China > Email:xueliang@sinap.ac.cn > MSN: xliang1984(a)hotmail.com > ************************************************************** > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: users-bounces(a)lists.kamailio.org on behalf of Iñaki Baz Castillo > Sent: Mon 2009-10-5 23:37 > To: users(a)lists.kamailio.org > Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] fs_index.cxx:1: error: bad value (x86_64) > for-march (mtune)= switch > > El Lunes, 5 de Octubre de 2009, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribió: > > I am doing MC simulation at STAR. > > Is it a new VoIP service? > -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc(a)aliax.net>

2 1

[Kamailio-Users] kamailio as registrar server
by Rajesh 06 Oct '09

06 Oct '09

Dear All, I would like my kamailio server to act (only) as a Registrar server. I have configured my kamilio for performing authentication successfully, but this time i find that authentication is not being done.Your views on my cfg is greatly appreciated. # ------------------ module loading ---------------------------------- debug=3 log_stderror=yes mpath="/usr/local/lib/kamailio/modules/" loadmodule "db_mysql.so" loadmodule "mi_fifo.so" loadmodule "sl.so" loadmodule "pv.so" loadmodule "usrloc.so" loadmodule "registrar.so" loadmodule "textops.so" loadmodule "uri_db.so" loadmodule "auth.so" loadmodule "auth_db.so" port=5060 # ----------------- setting module-specific parameters --------------- # ----- mi_fifo params ----- modparam("mi_fifo", "fifo_name", "/tmp/kamailio_fifo") # ----- auth_db params ----- /* uncomment the following lines if you want to enable the DB based authentication */ modparam("auth_db", "calculate_ha1", yes) modparam("auth_db", "password_column", "password") modparam("auth_db", "db_url","mysql://openser:openserrw@localhost/openser") modparam("auth_db", "load_credentials", "") # -- usrloc params -- modparam("usrloc", "db_url", "mysql://openser:openserrw@192.168.64.75/openser") modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 3) # ------------------------- request routing logic ------------------- # main routing logic route{ # initial sanity checks -- too long messages if (msg:len >= 2048 ) { sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); exit; }; if (!uri==myself) { sl_send_reply("400", "Bad destination, only register messages destined for this server are accepted"); exit; }; # the only valid message for the registrar is the register message # other messages are answered with an error message if (uri==myself) { if (method=="REGISTER") { sl_send_reply("100", "Trying"); if(!save("location")) { sl_reply_error(); }; exit; } else { sl_send_reply("403", "Forbidden"); exit; }; }; # Authentication route if (is_method("REGISTER")) { # authenticate the REGISTER requests (uncomment to enable auth) if (!www_authorize("192.168.64.75", "subscriber")) { www_challenge("192.168.64.75", "0"); exit; } ###the following lines are uncommented if ($au!=$tU) { sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); exit; } } else { # authenticate if from local subscriber (uncomment to enable auth) if (from_uri==myself) { if (!proxy_authorize("", "subscriber")) { proxy_challenge("", "0"); exit; } if (is_method("PUBLISH")) { if ($au!=$tU) { sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); exit; } } else { if ($au!=$fU) { sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); exit; } } consume_credentials(); # caller authenticated } } return; } -- Regards, Rajesh

2 1

[Serusers] Can SER 2.0.0-rc1 pstn.cfg file actually work with BYE from PSTN?
by Frank Durda IV 06 Oct '09

06 Oct '09

Does SER 2.0.0-rc1/examples/pstn.cfg or the much more complete one in Chapter 8 of "SER Getting Started" actually work when it comes to a BYE comming from the PSTN gateway? So far, it appears these two cfg files don't cope with the called party on the PSTN hangs up first, and it isn't clear how it could be made to work in anything more complex than a one-SIP-call-source one pstn-gateway configuration. Let's say I have four clients from which a call can originate and arrive at SER, with the caller source IP addresses of "A", "B", "C" and "D". "C" sends the INVITE of a call that SER determined is destined for the PSTN gateway, which is at IP address "P". Here, the INVITE, 100 Trying, 180/183, 200 OK and ACK messages all go to the right places and look more or less correct. If "C" sends a BYE to end the call, this also works correctly, with SER forwarding that on to "P" and the 200 OK being returned. So far, so good. However, if the called party on the PSTN hangs up first, "P" sends SER a BYE and SER simply sends the BYE right back to "P", whom responds with a "481" back. The originating party at "C" never finds out that the call has ended, because SER didn't pass the BYE on to the calling device. The SIP phone stays in the "Connected" state. In my case, the calling sites A, B, C and D don't include a Record-Route of their own, but sometimes have a Via: header. In either case, SER still doesn't send a BYE or re-INVITE coming from P to the correct destination of A, B, C or D. I don't know how I could force SER to send the BYE or INVITE on to the right place, given four possible call-initiator IP addresses, of which only "C" would know about this sample call. I don't believe I can stick in an extra Record-Route when handling the original INVITE that has the call source IP address in it (in addition to a Record-Route of my own), simply because I don't believe SER will let me dynamically select which senders IP address should go in the forged Record-Route, or if doing so would really help the situation later when that trail of crumbs might be helpful. Also, even though the pstn.cfg sample in the book has lots of steps to check for fraud before processing a re-INVITE coming from the PSTN (and the footnotes say that this is what these checks are for), I don't see how SER would know the right place to send the re-INVITE that came from the PSTN once it the authentication checks were done. It looks like SER will always send it to "P" regardless of which direction it should be sent, which doesn't help much, and puts any call using Session-Expires: to failure, when 50% of that time (plus 32.5 seconds) has passed. So, is there with a corrected pstn.cfg out there, or better still, has anybody actually made these two situations work, which are: (1) The called party on the PSTN hangs-up first which causes a BYE to be sent to SER. SER forwards the BYE to the right caller (or whatever the so-called proxy is supposed to do), AND (2) the SIP-PSTN gateway device sends a re-INVITE to SER and it goes somewhere that will generate an OK reply If someone has made it work, can they show an example, rather than just say "it should be possible" or "works for me"? Such responses are encouraging, but not that helpful. Thanks in advance!

3 12

Jump to page:

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