sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

36 participants
37509 discussions

Kamailio v6.0.0 Released - new major version is out
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 29 Jan '25

29 Jan '25

Kamailio v6.0.0 is out – it comes with 5 new modules and important updates to the core components and existing modules. The increment of the first version number reflects several important updates, among them: multi-threaded option for UDP receiving, option for specifying a range of ports to listen to, support for expressions with variables for most of the module functions parameters, internal libraries are directly inked to the core, support to use cmake to compile and install Kamailio. You can read a bit more detailed release notes at: * https://www.kamailio.org/w/kamailio-v6.0-0-release-notes/ Many thanks to all developers and community members that made possible this release. v6.0.0 brings more flexibility and optimizations across many existing components and modules, new parameters, functions, variables and transformations. Enjoy Kamailio v6.0.0! Thank you for flying Kamailio! 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

2 2

Releasing v5.8.5
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 29 Jan '25

29 Jan '25

Hello, I am considering to release Kamailio v5.8.5 (out of branch 5.8) on Thursday, Jan 23, 2025. If anyone is aware of issues not yet on the bug tracker, report them there asap in order to have a better chance to be fixed. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla (@ asipto.com) twitter.com/miconda -- linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Consultancy, Training and Development Services -- asipto.com

1 2

MS Teams BYE routing
by Barry Flanagan 28 Jan '25

28 Jan '25

Hi all, I have a Teams gw working apart from one issue., In a call originated in Teams,. if the called party hangs up, the BYE is sent to api-du-b-euwe.pstnhub.microsoft.com:443 which does not work. This is taken from the Contact header of the ACK I presume. Here is the ACK to the 200 OK: 28/01/2025 17:08:26.560 +00:00: 52.114.75.24:53728 -> 100.100.198.241:5061 ACK sip:9000@teams.domain.com:5061;transport=tls;tps=atpsh-67990f01-8ed8-1 SIP/2.0 FROM: "Teams User" <sip:+35314375362@sip.pstnhub.microsoft.com:5061;user=phone>;tag=c29cb7a79ddf40f9ba909f3f1034a770 TO: <sip:9000@teams.domain.com:5061>;user=phone;tag=as6e287620 CSEQ: 1 ACK CALL-ID: e49f7df631ee576286ecf159e81952fe MAX-FORWARDS: 70 VIA: SIP/2.0/TLS 52.114.75.24:5061;branch=z9hG4bK46d28f33 CONTACT: <sip:api-du-b-euwe.pstnhub.microsoft.com:443;x-i=0781e8a1-91e6-4f6a-bc4a-73d6890827d4;x-c=e49f7df631ee576286ecf159e81952fe/d/8/703117d8337e4975a8216a54f59035c2> CONTENT-LENGTH: 0 USER-AGENT: Microsoft.PSTNHub.SIPProxy v.2025.1.20.11 i.EUWE.7 ALLOW: INVITE,ACK,OPTIONS,CANCEL,BYE,NOTIFY ..and here is the BYE. 28/01/2025 17:08:36.119 +00:00: 100.100.198.241:5060 -> 52.123.134.13:443 BYE sip:api-du-b-euwe.pstnhub.microsoft.com:443;x-i=0781e8a1-91e6-4f6a-bc4a-73d6890827d4;x-c=e49f7df631ee576286ecf159e81952fe/d/8/703117d8337e4975a8216a54f59035c2 SIP/2.0 Record-Route: <sip:teams.domain.com:5061;transport=tls;ftag=as6e287620;lr;r2=on> Record-Route: <sip:100.100.198.241:5060;ftag=as6e287620;lr;r2=on> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 100.100.198.241;branch=z9hG4bKc89c.0c1cf04a771c30293432e5f1f59331c8.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 102.102.139.182:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK3c42c163 Max-Forwards: 69 From: <sip:9000@teams.domain.com:5061>;user=phone;tag=as6e287620 To: "Teams User"<sip:+35314375362@sip.pstnhub.microsoft.com:5061;user=phone>;tag=c29cb7a79ddf40f9ba909f3f1034a770 Call-ID: e49f7df631ee576286ecf159e81952fe CSeq: 102 BYE Content-Length: 0 How can I get around this? Using a pretty standard WITHINDLG route. I am using topos but not manipulating the Contact header. Thanks! -Barry

4 8

RTPengine module - pause/resume recording
by Who AmI 28 Jan '25

28 Jan '25

Hi list, I have been looking at the recording daemon in RTPengine with Kamailio controlling this via rtpengine_manage() flags: "record-call=on" in the initial Invite, or 200OK based on direction. I tested and this works brilliantly for the full calls, but when looking at pause/resume the module documentation is bare and I am a bit confused. It looks like the ngcp docs and Opensips module docs (for RTPengine) describe the pause/resume as just another start/stop flag. Use case is simple, all calls are recorded, but we want the option to pause, then resume once any private or personal information exchange has completed. My question is also simple - Is this the recommended way to pause and then resume recordings or have I missed something? The Kamailio documentation doesn't explicitly say this ( https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules/rtpengine.html#rtpengi…) so just looking for advice if this is the best route to go. Thanks, John.

2 2

Re: [sr-dev] Re: Branching 6.0 series
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 28 Jan '25

28 Jan '25

Hello, 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. shall we still aim for releasing v6.0.0 on this upcoming Wednesday, January 29, 2025? We the old-Makefiles kept, it is doable, the wiki pages needs to be created for this release series, which I can do tomorrow, as I waited to see if how it should be the recommended method for compilation/installation. If the feeling is that we should wait, then probably the target date has to be shifted somewhere in the week starting on February 10, 2025, because Fosdem follows this weekend and then some countries have a week holiday break. If no other opinions and change of decision, the release will be done on Wednesday, with content using the old-Makefiles (to reuse existing tutorials) and reference to cmake variant when it is the case. 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

2 1

defining configuration variables
by Sergio Charrua 27 Jan '25

27 Jan '25

Hello, just wondering if there is any way to define 2 constants as : # sets quarantine period the URL is set, in secs, after number of HTTP_RETRIES retries #!define SOME_VAR_1 60 # sets the configuration values for HTable module parameter #!define SOME_VAR_2 "some_configration_value" + SOME_VAR_1 I couldn't find anything in docs, and made several different ways without success. Any suggestions? Atenciosamente / Kind Regards / Cordialement / Un saludo, *Sérgio Charrua*

2 2

UDP worker lock investigation
by Володимир Іванець 26 Jan '25

26 Jan '25

Hello everyone! I was wondering if it is possible to get information about a packet that is being possessed by the worker without increasing log level? I have an installation with Kamailio that is configured with two interfaces. Once in a while Kamailio stops accepting requests on one of the interfaces. It works fine for requests from other one. I think that worker processes might be locked while processing some requests. Enabling debug log is not an option because the traffic is quite high and the log file will not just be enormous, some lines will be missing. It looks like syslog will skip some of the log entries. So is it possible to check what packet worker process is currently processing? Or do I need to add some log entries with lower log level to trace requests manually? Thank you!

3 4

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

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