sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

10 participants
37460 discussions

[Serusers] ser 0.9.6 # mediaproxy # one-way audio
by davor jovanovic 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Hi all, I’m using ser 0.9.6 with mediaproxy and latest version of XLite client. I have a problem with one-way audio when calling client on another domain (not served by our SER). When Xlite uses public address (not behind NAT) I can't receive audio from other side, but when I connect that same XLite client by way of dial-up or ADSL everything is OK. I suppose that in second case (ADSL) mediaproxy is included in the process and that is way call succeeds. I don't know what is a problem when client isn't behind NAT, but it has public IP address. All combinations of calls are working with no problem when all users are using only our SER. I'm using configuration similar to that in SER Getting started (NAT part is same), but if needed I can email it. If anyone had similar problem, please help, a would appreciated it! Thanks /davor

1 1

[Users] Problem with $dlg_count
by Leonid Fainshtein 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Thank you, Daniel. Your recommendation helped. Leonid ******************************************** This outgoing mail message was scanned by McAfee GroupShield Engine %tn%

1 0

[Serusers] Idea for concurrent calls statistics?
by Tobias Lindgren 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Hi all, I'd like to somehow count concurrent outgoing calls through my SER from my customers, based on the source ip-address in the SIP-request. I'm running with the TM-module. Does anyone have an idea on how this could be done? Br, Tobias

2 1

[Users] openserctl fifo
by Klaus Darilion 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Hi! I can nowhere found the setting for the fifo use inside openserctl. The default is /tmp/openser_fifo - where can I change this? thanks klaus -- Klaus Darilion nic.at

5 7

Re: [Serusers] Ser accounting question?
by Greger V. Teigre 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Copy the list. Sending private emails just make them add to the end of my big inbox. I don't know where the service type comes from. That's where you need to define it. g-) Lokesh Kumar wrote: > > Where I can define service type? If this not from ser then must be > conflicting from radius dictionary. Can you suggest something.? > > > > Thanks > > > > Lokesh > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Greger V. Teigre [mailto:greger@teigre.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, December 07, 2006 10:11 AM > *To:* Lokesh Kumar > *Cc:* serusers(a)iptel.org > *Subject:* Re: [Serusers] Ser accounting question? > > > > The service-type is set by the sender of the accounting packet. I'm > not aware of such a service-type in ser. > g-) > > Lokesh Kumar wrote: > > Hello List, > > > > Below mentioned is my accounting packet, I would like to know what is > IAPP-AP-Check, what this check do , and where its configuration > present. Can I change Service-Type ? > > > > Wed Dec 6 20:08:23 2006 > > Acct-Status-Type = Stop > > Service-Type = IAPP-AP-Check > > Sip-Response-Code = 200 > > Sip-Method = 8 > > User-Name = "69021(a)xxx.yyy.pt" <mailto:69021@xxx.yyy.pt> > > Calling-Station-Id = "sip:69021@xxx.yyy.pt" > <mailto:sip:69021@xxx.yyy.pt> > > Called-Station-Id = "sip:30612@xxx.yyy.pt" > <mailto:sip:30612@xxx.yyy.pt> > > Sip-Translated-Request-URI = "sip:30612@212.13.xx.yy:5060" > <mailto:sip:30612@212.13.xx.yy:5060> > > Acct-Session-Id = > "D4808CE2-1BA9-4572-B82B-5A0BCF6AB7CB(a)192.168.0.47" > <mailto:D4808CE2-1BA9-4572-B82B-5A0BCF6AB7CB@192.168.0.47> > > Sip-To-Tag = "86949D74-2699" > > Sip-From-Tag = "67434843439" > > Sip-Cseq = "3" > > NAS-Port = 5060 > > Acct-Delay-Time = 0 > > NAS-IP-Address = 127.0.0.1 > > Client-IP-Address = 127.0.0.1 > > Acct-Unique-Session-Id = "c6adb5da735b1150" > > Timestamp = 1165435703 > > > > Thanks > > > > Lokesh > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.6/567 - Release Date: 12/4/2006 > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > Serusers mailing list > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org <mailto:Serusers@lists.iptel.org> > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.6/567 - Release Date: 12/4/2006 > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.6/567 - Release Date: 12/4/2006 >

3 3

Re: [Users] SIP message being sent twice
by Klaus Darilion 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Fernando Freitas wrote: > Hi all, > > I am having a situation that every SIP message is being sent twice when > reaching openser. It seems that the message when hits proxy it is processed > twice. I double checked my cfg file, but didn't find anything. Please help > me. Maybe you add another branch in your openser config. Are they really the same (also the branch parameter in the Via header)? regards klaus > > Thanks, > > Fernando Freitas. > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users(a)openser.org > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users -- Klaus Darilion nic.at

1 0

Re: Re: [Serusers] SIPSAK - wrong behaviou r??
by tzieleniewski 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

yes you are right:) but the stange situation is the following (version from svn): UA1 SIPProxy | | |INVITE 3 | |------------->| | | |407 3 | |<-------------| | | |ACK 3 | |------------->| | | |INVITE 4 | |------------->| | | |TRYING 4 | |<-------------| | | |INVITE 4 | |<-------------| | | |ACK 3 | |------------->| | | |INVITE 4 | |<-------------| | | after the end of dialog related to cseq 3 ua (sipsak) sends an invite (with cseq 4) to sipproxy then there is the provisional response trying and sipproxy sends invite further (actually the same ua) to sipsak and the reaction of sipsak is: ACK with with cseq 3 instead of OK or 4xx, this scenarion is repeated until sipproxy sends the 408 timeout with cseq 4 after wich ua (sipsak) resposes with ACK with cseq 4 what do you think about this?:) bests tomek ---- Wiadomość Oryginalna ---- Od: Michal Matyska <michal(a)iptel.org> Do: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org Data: 11 grudnia 2006 20:59 Temat: Re: [Serusers] SIPSAK - wrong behaviour?? > I was just curious, so I took look on the ngrep.... > > there is short jump in the description between points 2 and 3.... > 2a. sipsak sends ACK upon 407 reply, which is 100% correct > 2b. sipsak resends INVITE with correct credentials > 2c. ser forwards the INVITE to the sipsak @ port 5060 > 3. sipsak sends ACK (with the CSeq: 3, Via: headers look like > combination of original ACK and passed INVITE Vias), which you've found > inappropriate, right? Just to make sure we talk about the same ACK :-D > > Michal > > On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 19:12 +0100, Nils Ohlmeier wrote: > > Hi Tomasz, > > > > On Monday 11 December 2006 17:21, tzieleniewski wrote: > > > Hi ALL! > > > I am trying to run some tests under sipsak but I obtain strange result > > > I invoke sip stack with the following command: > > > sipsak -IU -vv -s sip:sipsak@scscf.ims.touk.pl -a sipsak -l 5061 -H > > > 192.168.0.129 The registration proces runs without any problem, user > > > registers and then sipsak sends invite to ser. And here comes the strange > > > thing > > > 1. sipsak sends invite to ser: > > > 2. Ser sends the proxy authentication required response 407 (from ngrep) > > > 3. sipsak receives the message andresponses with the ACK???? > > > Ive placed the ngrep from the sipsak socket in the attached file. > > > > that looks like a bug. I'll try to look into that later. > > It would be great if you could try if the same behavior is still present in > > the latest version from subversion (let me know if I should send you a > > tarball of that). And the output from sipsak with -vvv would be a great help. > > Just send that directly to me. > > > > Thanks > > Nils > > _______________________________________________ > > 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

[Users] SIP message being sent twice
by Fernando Freitas 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

Hi all, I am having a situation that every SIP message is being sent twice when reaching openser. It seems that the message when hits proxy it is processed twice. I double checked my cfg file, but didn't find anything. Please help me. Thanks, Fernando Freitas.

1 0

[Serusers] Monitoring
by Peter Kuebler 11 Dec '06

11 Dec '06

Hello Hendrik, I was reading your post and wondering if you have made any progress on SER monitoring? Especially in regard to enhancing the snmpd to monitor the number of users and transactions? http://lists.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2006-January/026771.html Hello Hendrik, What about VRRP for failover ? SER1 (master) sip agents == || === Asterisk Farm==sip/pstn gateway SER2 (slave) Harry --- Hendrik Scholz <hendrik.scholz at freenet-ag.de <http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers> > a écrit : > Hi! > > hgaillac-sip at yahoo.fr <http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers> wrote: > > Yes I know about snmp module. > > There is no way to monitor SER vi snmp !? > > As others have noted SER does not directly support > SNMP but you can > easily enhance your snmpd to support it. > You add serctl fifo commands using the snmp exec > directive > to monitor the number of users, transactions stuff, > ... > The meminfo patch (now included) is handy and you > can directly pipe > serctl fifo meminfo into SNMP and create nifty > graphs. > > sipsak comes in handy, i.e. sending an OPTIONS > request and measuring > a) if a response comes back and b) the time > processing took. > > Much better would be monitoring INVITE/REGISTER > response behaviour since > that usually requires a whole lot more interaction > (radius, db, ..) > on SER side. > > Hendrik > Peter Kuebler Director Network Reliability tele: 703-636-1114 ext: 112 tele: 703-734-4112(alt) cell: 240-506-5703 SunRocket 8045 Leesburg Pike, Suite 300 Vienna, VA 22182 peter.kuebler(a)sunrocket.com SunRocket NOC 703-637-9970

4 3

[Users] problem with forking...
by Frogger 11 Dec '06

11 Dec '06

I am seeing a problem forking more than 7. Any phones that are beyond the 7th device get 180 ringin but Openser cannot receive the invite to answer the call. Any thoughts on why I cannot increase the children? (BTW, "openserctl ps" shows the proper number of children. For example, when set to 14, "ps" shows 14 children. However any UA beyond 7 cannot answer the forked call.) Thanks, MC ____________________________________________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com

2 2

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