sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

48 participants
37555 discussions

[Users] How to get the most stable 1.2.x release sources?
by Anatoly Pidruchny 09 May '07

09 May '07

Hi, all, I could not find a good explanation of the releasing policy for OpenSER. I mean, 1.2.0 was released on March 12, 2007. I know that the future release is 1.3.0. But is there going to be 1.2.1 ever released? There were many bugs fixed in 1.2.x since 1.2.0 was released. I think I read a developer's reply that the best and most stable OpenSER 1.2.x release sources can only be downloaded from the SVN 1.2 branch. Is this true? And what is the trunk version in SVN? Is it only for the next release (1.3.0) and changes to the trunk do not go to 1.2.x branch automatically? The download page (http://www.openser.org/mos/view/Download/) unfortunately does not tell that to get the most stable 1.2.x release one has to use SVN Download. I think most of the OpenSER users just download the released 1.2.0 sources. By the way, looks like the so called "daily" SVN snapshots have not been posted since April 23. Is this a known problem? Thanks, Anatoly.

4 5

[Serusers] ser_ctl
by Tuan Nguyen 09 May '07

09 May '07

Hi, Can someone tell me what does is mean this error: tuandat@ubuntu:~/serctl$ ./ser_ctl domain add iptel.org ser_ctl: No module named MySQLdb: ImportError I have already create mysql database ser with ser_mysql.sh script. I can show tables of ser database but I can't add domain. thanks for response Tuan.

3 2

Re: [Serusers] Which version of SER to use?
by Greger V. Teigre 09 May '07

09 May '07

:-) Spend 30 minutes on SER 2.0; it's easier than you think. etc/ser.cfg is a decent config. g-) Eneref wrote: > If I actually knew anything about how all the new stuff worked, I'd be > happy to help. ;) Sort of a chicken and egg problem. > > Unfortunately, as late, in my copious free time (*cough*), I haven't > had the time to delve into the SER 2.0 stuff and actually figure out > for myself how it all meshes together. > > N. > > > Greger V. Teigre wrote: >> heh heh, as iptel.org is an open-source project, we need a sponsor to >> pay for a technical writer if we want one. Iptego did that for SEMS >> documentation, but we don't have a documentation sponsor for SER. I'm >> afraid paid beer does not bring us far... >> >> So, we will have to cope with the volunteers we have. An advanced >> user, like you, is as good a writer as anyone, so if you want to put >> your keyboard fingers where your mouth is ;-), you are very welcome >> to sign up as a volunteer on either of our three current >> documentation efforts: >> 1. Migration guide (editor: Simon Miles) >> 2. Reference guide (editor: yours truly) >> 3. SER - Getting Started (editor: ?) >> >> I'm in the process of coordinating the table of contents with Simon, >> but here's an attempted outline: >> http://www.iptel.org/suggestion_for_outline_of_new_ser_reference_manual >> >> Feel free to sign up for any chapter or maybe editor of the Getting >> Started guide?! >> g-) >> >> SIP wrote: >>> Oh don't worry. I won't take it the wrong way. I'll be the first to >>> tell you that the documentation for SER is pretty close to >>> unusable. But unfortunately, that's the way most open source >>> projects are. You have all these coding geniuses building them, and >>> all these systems geniuses testing them... and not a single one of >>> them remembers how to convey information to the rest of us. ;) >>> >>> What the project lacks is a full-time technical writer -- someone >>> whose job it is is to corner the developers and ask them what all of >>> this stuff means (in intricate detail) and not let them go until >>> they've fully explained all of it. Then he/she can take that >>> information and translate it into something human beings can >>> understand. >>> >>> This is one reason why good technical writers are expensive, and the >>> primary reason that most companies and projects 'make do' with >>> whatever they can find. >>> >>> If you know any good technical writers who might be willing to fly >>> off to Europe and ply some of the SER team with beer enough to get >>> them talking, we could most certainly use it. I'll pay for the beer. ;) >>> >>> N. >>> >>> >>> lists(a)infoway.net wrote: >>>> Excellent news. Thanks for the feedback. Overall, and please don't >>>> take this negatively, I think documentation for SER is difficult >>>> for beginners, so if we have to go through the learning curve >>>> anyway, we might as well do it in the newer version. >>>> >>>> Thanks again >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 8, 2007 5:04 pm, SIP <sip(a)arcdiv.com> said: >>>> >>>> >>>>> For all intents and purposes, SER 2.0 (the new one) is ready for use. >>>>> The only thing it's really waiting on to be 'stable' is some better >>>>> documentation. However, it's best, if you're just getting >>>>> started, to >>>>> deploy with the new version and maybe muddle your way through a bit >>>>> until documentation is complete. >>>>> >>>>> N. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> lists(a)infoway.net wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> We are planning on deploying a couple of SER servers and >>>>>> integrate them with >>>>>> either SEMS or Asterisk for voicemail. However, we are a bit >>>>>> confused as to which >>>>>> version of SER to go with? From what we can tell, the latest >>>>>> stable version is >>>>>> 0.9.6. However, we know of the new 0.10.X version. Reading up on >>>>>> the site, there >>>>>> is some documentation that explains a little bit of the >>>>>> differences and/or >>>>>> migration recommendations/steps. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, in an effort to keep life as simple as possible, which >>>>>> version should we work >>>>>> with? We are afraid that if we go through a learning cycle with >>>>>> 0.9.6 we're going >>>>>> to "suffer" when migrating to the new version, either because of >>>>>> the learning >>>>>> curve or because of a potential painful migration process. >>>>>> >>>>>> Any recommendations? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Serusers mailing list >>>>>> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org >>>>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Serusers mailing list >>> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org >>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >>> >>> > >

1 0

[Serusers] authentication
by Stefan Ljung (TN/EAB) 09 May '07

09 May '07

Im on ser 0.9.6. Om looking for a simple way to configure my SER to check that all INVITEs coming in on a specific IP interface are coming from clients that have a valid registration. I know about the ip.src check but how to do lookups with From: URIs in the registrar is beyond me. /Stefan

2 1

[Serusers] registrar module in ser rel 2_0_0 - errors in setting parameters
by tzieleniewski 09 May '07

09 May '07

Hi, I am configuring registrar module and I get the following errors: 0(29188) set_mod_param_regex: parameter <desc_time_order> not found in module <registrar> 0(29188) parse error (88,19-20): Can't set module parameter when I try to set such module parameters: modparam("registrar", "desc_time_order", 1) modparam("registrar", "retry_after", 30) Are they still supported? Maybe under different name? Cheers Tomasz

2 1

[Serusers] tls module documentation not available
by tzieleniewski 09 May '07

09 May '07

Hi, The tls module documentation is unavailable page - http://www.iptel.org/ser/doc/modules/tls. is it temporary?? Cheers Tomasz

2 1

[Users] How to use forward command with script variables?
by Noel R. Morais 09 May '07

09 May '07

Hi All, I am trying to do something like this: route[1] { $var(forwardTo) = "192.168.192.100"; forward($var(forwardTo)); exit; } But it do not work. you know a way to do it? Thanks Noel

3 2

[Serusers] isup-oli
by Jai Rangi 09 May '07

09 May '07

Hello, Can some please tell me how can I capture isup-oli field from a incoming call. We need to capture that to recognize the incoming call from pay phone. Thank you, -Jai

3 3

[Users] XCAP-Lite problems
by Schumann Sebastian 09 May '07

09 May '07

Dear all, starting to build up OpenSER as presence server, I had no mentionable problems. Now, I tried to implement an Apache2 based XCAP server to store presence info, buddy lists etc. there. I have a problem setting up the XCAP-Lite server v0.9. Searching the web and the mailing list did not lead to a successful answer why the following happens: After setting up Apache2 with all required modules, virtual host etc. I try to use Eyebeam 1.5 to write the presrules and resource-list.xml to the database. This failes. I have successfully installed Apache2 with pear (+ extensions), php, mysql support. I created a virtual host with the following settings: NameVirtualHost * <VirtualHost *> <Location "/"> Dav On #necessary for PUT method </Location> ServerName 172.16.167.128 DocumentRoot /var/www/ #/var/www/xcap-root didn't work for GET as well, changed RewriteEngine On RewriteLog /var/log/apache2/rewrite.log RewriteLogLevel 2 RewriteRule /xcap-root/(.*) /xcap-root/index.php ProxyVia On </VirtualHost> I putted all files from XCAP-Lite archive in /var/www/xcap-root. After using PUT method through Eyebeam (change in contact list) I receive the 204 No content message. BUT: Not the database content is changed, the putted XML file overwrites index.php instead, which means, further requests fail. Does anybody know why the access to database does not work? Password etc. in config.php is ok. Thanks in advance. Best regards Sebastian PS: As I didn't find a mail address of the author of the program, I hope he is also subscribed to that list. There is probably an error in xcap-lib.php on line 766. I think there is a space between function and XCAPclient necessary.

3 5

Re: [Serusers] Which version of SER to use?
by lists＠infoway.net 09 May '07

09 May '07

Excellent news. Thanks for the feedback. Overall, and please don't take this negatively, I think documentation for SER is difficult for beginners, so if we have to go through the learning curve anyway, we might as well do it in the newer version. Thanks again On Tue, May 8, 2007 5:04 pm, SIP <sip(a)arcdiv.com> said: > For all intents and purposes, SER 2.0 (the new one) is ready for use. > The only thing it's really waiting on to be 'stable' is some better > documentation. However, it's best, if you're just getting started, to > deploy with the new version and maybe muddle your way through a bit > until documentation is complete. > > N. > > > lists(a)infoway.net wrote: >> We are planning on deploying a couple of SER servers and integrate them with >> either SEMS or Asterisk for voicemail. However, we are a bit confused as to which >> version of SER to go with? From what we can tell, the latest stable version is >> 0.9.6. However, we know of the new 0.10.X version. Reading up on the site, there >> is some documentation that explains a little bit of the differences and/or >> migration recommendations/steps. >> >> So, in an effort to keep life as simple as possible, which version should we work >> with? We are afraid that if we go through a learning cycle with 0.9.6 we're going >> to "suffer" when migrating to the new version, either because of the learning >> curve or because of a potential painful migration process. >> >> Any recommendations? >> >> Thanks >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Serusers mailing list >> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org >> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >> > >

3 3

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