sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

10 participants
37461 discussions

[Serusers] accounting question
by Nhadie 27 Jun '06

27 Jun '06

Hi All, Should I also account BYE's with sip_status not equal to 200? if i don't i might lose some minutes that I will alreadybe billed by the gteway and if I do customers might tell me that those calls are not completed. Hope you guys can help me. Thanks Regards, Nhadie ________________________________________________ Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7

2 1

[Serusers] Assure a BYE is received ??
by Ryan Pagquil 27 Jun '06

27 Jun '06

Hi, How can I be sure that all calls are terminated by a BYE message? I have some instances that a BYE message is not logged by SER. Is there a way to fix this? What could be the possible scenarios that causes missing BYE's? Thanks, Ryan

3 3

Re: [Serusers] How do I get rid of npdi=yes?
by Jiri Kuthan 26 Jun '06

26 Jun '06

At 15:43 24/06/2006, John Clements wrote: >> You have a broken UA. > >Where do you get that? Nothing is broken, its the Number Porting flag the >TDM sends. If anything, Asterisk and SER are broken because they do not >recognize it :-) Hi John, I am wondering why you think that SER is broken? IMHO, as Juha pointed out your URI may be a 'valid' result of standard-recommended way of translating Tel to Sip URIs (Rfc3261, 19.1.6). Now since the same specification does not syntactically recognize parameters with the userpart of a URI, your username is matched in usr-loc database against what it is (some number, followed by semicolon, ndpdi and some more characters). I agree that most likely such lookup does not make much sense (unless you really have usernames with semicolon in it :-))). To me, the recommendation in rfc3261 seems not entirely thought thru -- one obviously didn't want to mix one parameter set with another. However processing the username-embedded parameters hasn't been addressed, making it as a result a subject of local URI policy. SER's subst_uri can fix it for you, i.e., implement your policy 'throw all parameters from userpart', -jiri p.s. -- recall my previous comment about lack of domain, I just 'misparsed' at some of the characters in the URI. >And its subst_uri() that gets rid of it. I found it last night. Thanks >though. > > -John > > >> AFAIK it's not possible with From. SER processes messages and always >> keep the original message. When you do subst etc, you basically tell SER >> how to change the message before sending a reply or forwarding. The ruri >> can be changed (but still the original uri is kept, i.e. revert_uri()) >> The lookup function will use the From in the original message, >> regardless of what you do. >> You have a broken UA. >> g-) >> >> John Clements wrote: >>> I've looked around and have found one or two other posts asking about >>> this, but I have never seen an answer. The From is: >>> >>> =uri: <sip:5551212;npdi=yes@x.x.x.x:5060;dtg=SIP;user=phone> >>> >>> Which causes a number of issues. USRLOC no longer works: >>> >>> =lookup(): '5551212;npdi=yes' Not found in usrloc >>> >>> And when you send the call to an Asterisk server, Asterisk wigs out >>> because it truncates everything after the first ";" it encounters in the >>> URI. Does anyone have any idea how to get rid of it? I've tried subst(), >>> but could not get it to work. :-( >>> >>> >>> -John >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 -- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/

1 0

Re: [Users] "513 Message too big" for the Invite
by Bogdan-Andrei Iancu 26 Jun '06

26 Jun '06

Hi Reddy, what you mean by shutting down? any logs? regards, bogdan Reddy, Muralidhar wrote: >Hello Bogdan, > > Thanks for your help. > It is working now. > > But after 8-10 calls Proxy shuts down. Do I need to increase the >memory? > >Thanks, >Murali >Phone: 301-515-3716 >e-mail: mreddy(a)ti.com > >-----Original Message----- >From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu [mailto:bogdan@voice-system.ro] >Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 5:37 AM >To: Reddy, Muralidhar >Cc: users(a)openser.org >Subject: Re: [Users] "513 Message too big" for the Invite > >Hi Reddy, > >probably the message exceeds the 4096 bytes configured in the script. >try to increase the value or to disable the check (# if......#endif does > >not work - try # or // for each line or the C like /*...*/)... > >regards, >bogdan > >Reddy, Muralidhar wrote: > > > >>Hello, >> >>Everything works fine if I run Proxy without TLS disabled. >> >>I tried both TCP/UDP, it works fine. >> >>For TLS, Registration went fine however Proxy responds "513 Message >>too big" to the Invite. >> >>I don't see any wrong headers in the message. >> >>The length is almost same for TCP and TLS invite message, the only >>change is sip and sips. >> >>Any 'C' file or config file I need to modify? >> >>

1 0

[Users] internal server error " 500 ".
by raviprakash sunkara 26 Jun '06

26 Jun '06

Hi users, I'm cracking my head with "500 :-I'm terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL) " . What's mean this... When I trying to calls from softphone to softphone " its says above message '. openser server ip 192.168.2.4 sip -domain is xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx softphones ip are 192.168.2.21 and 20 which behind the NAT ( i.e not in server location ,its some where place ) please check the marked one in debug. SIP Request: 0(29266) method: <INVITE> 0(29266) uri: <sip:104@24.98.157.209> 0(29266) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=2 0(29266) Found param type 235, <rport> = <n/a>; state=6 0(29266) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK1EA935B35FA14629985951EBA8B3F547>; state=16 0(29266) end of header reached, state=5 0(29266) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(29266) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(29266) After parse_msg... 0(29266) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(29266) LOG:- step1 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=100 0(29266) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=9 0(29266) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <t> [25]; uri=[sip:104@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] 0(29266) DEBUG: to body [<sip:104@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx> ] 0(29266) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <3472> <INVITE> 0(29266) DEBUG:maxfwd:is_maxfwd_present: value = 70 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=200 0(29266) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=149 0(29266) found end of header 0(29266) find_first_route: No Route headers found 0(29266) loose_route: There is no Route HF 0(29266) LOG:- method not reg 0(29266) DEBUG: add_param: tag=612182576 0(29266) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=200 0(29266) find_first_route: No Route headers found 0(29266) loose_route: There is no Route HF 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==11 && xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] == [192.168.2.4] 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 13==13 && xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] == [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(29266) LOG:- uri method myself 0(29266) LOG:- INVITE & ACK IN URI 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(29266) DEBUG:check_content_type: type <application/sdp> found valid 0(29266) record_route(): Double attempt to record-route 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=58 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(29266) DEBUG:check_content_type: type <application/sdp> found valid 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=40 0(29266) force_rtp_proxy2: proxy reply: 35002 0(29266) DEBUG: t_newtran: msg id=5 , global msg id=0 , T on entrance=0xffffffff 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=78 0(29266) t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=43828, isACK=0 0(29266) DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matching failed 0(29266) DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no transaction found 0(29266) DBG: trans=0xb6123100, callback type 1, id 0 entered 0(29266) DEBUG:tm:t_relay: new INVITE 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(29266) check_via_address(61.17.248.68, 192.168.2.21, 0) 0(29266) WARNING:vqm_resize: resize(0) called 0(29266) DEBUG:tm:_reply_light: reply sent out. buf=0x81213a0: SIP/2.0 1..., shmem=0xb61247a8: SIP/2.0 1 0(29266) DEBUG:tm:_reply_light: finished 0(29266) DEBUG: mk_proxy: doing DNS lookup... 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=1000 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(29266) clen_builder: content-length: 187 (187) 0(29266) check_via_address(61.17.248.68, 192.168.2.21, 0) 0(29266) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[4]: 0xb612321c 0(29266) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[0]: 0xb612322c 0(29266) SER: new transaction fwd'ed 0(29266) rewrite_uri: Rewriting Request-URI with 'sip:104@192.168.2.20 :5060' 0(29266) lookup(): '104' Not found in usrloc 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==11 && [192.168.2.20] == [192.168.2.4] 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==13 && [192.168.2.20] == [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==11 && [192.168.2.20] == [192.168.2.4] 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==13 && [192.168.2.20] == xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx] 0(29266) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(29266) check_self: host != me 0(29266) LOG:_ uri in uri myself 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(29266) DEBUG: t_newtran: msg id=5 , global msg id=5 , T on entrance=0xb6123100 0(29266) ERROR: t_newtran: transaction already in process 0xb6123100 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(29266) check_via_address(61.17.248.68, 192.168.2.21, 0) 0(29266) ERROR: sl_reply_error used: I'm terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL) 0(29266) LOG:- ENeter into route 1 0(29266) DEBUG: t_newtran: msg id=5 , global msg id=5 , T on entrance=0xb6123100 0(29266) ERROR: t_newtran: transaction already in process 0xb6123100 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(29266) check_via_address(61.17.248.68, 192.168.2.21, 0) 0(29266) ERROR: sl_reply_error used: I'm terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL) 0(29266) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list (nil) 0(29266) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(29266) SIP Request: 0(29266) method: <ACK> 0(29266) uri: <sip:104@24.98.157.209> 0(29266) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=2 0(29266) Found param type 235, <rport> = <n/a>; state=6 0(29266) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK1EA935B35FA14629985951EBA8B3F547>; state=16 0(29266) end of header reached, state=5 0(29266) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(29266) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(29266) After parse_msg... 0(29266) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=8 0(29266) DEBUG: add_param: tag=30901ad8c164fe584bedac02134d4858.65cc 0(29266) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(29266) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <t> [67]; uri=[sip:104@24.98.157.209] 0(29266) DEBUG: to body [<sip:104@24.98.157.209>] 0(29266) DEBUG: sl_filter_ACK : local ACK found -> dropping it! 0(29266) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list (nil) 0(29266) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(29266) SIP Request: 0(29266) method: <ACK> 0(29266) uri: <sip:104@24.98.157.209> 0(29266) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=2 0(29266) Found param type 235, <rport> = <n/a>; state=6 0(29266) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK1EA935B35FA14629985951EBA8B3F547>; state=16 0(29266) end of header reached, state=5 0(29266) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(29266) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(29266) After parse_msg... 0(29266) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(29266) parse_headers: flags=8 0(29266) DEBUG: add_param: tag=30901ad8c164fe584bedac02134d4858.65cc 0(29266) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(29266) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <t> [67]; uri=[sip:104@24.98.157.209] 0(29266) DEBUG: to body [<sip:104@24.98.157.209>] 0(29266) DEBUG: sl_filter_ACK : local ACK found -> dropping it! 0(29266) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list (nil) ............................................................................... openser.cfg route { log("LOG:- step1\n"); if(!mf_process_maxfwd_header("13")) { sl_send_reply("483","Too many hops are there "); exit; }; if(msg:len>max_len) { sl_send_reply("513","Messages are Too Big ... !"); exit; }; # loose_route(); if(!method=="REGISTER") { log("LOG:- method not reg \n"); record_route(); }; if(loose_route()) { log("LOG:- loose route\n"); acc_rad_request("200"); t_relay(); exit; }; if(uri==myself) { log("LOG:- uri method myself\n"); if(method=="REGISTER") { log("LOG:- REG IN URI MY SELF \n"); if(!www_authorize("xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx.","subscriber")) { log("LOG :- REG IN URI AUTH\n"); www_challenge("xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx","0"); exit; }; save("location"); setflag(6); force_rport(); exit; }; if(method=="INVITE"||method=="ACK") { log("LOG:- INVITE & ACK IN URI \n"); # if (uri =~ "^sip:1].@*"){ # log("LOG:-rewrite port and host\n"); log("LOG:- Aftere the rewite \n "); fix_nated_sdp("1"); record_route(); acc_rad_request("Start"); force_rtp_proxy(); t_on_reply("1"); t_relay(); }; if(method=="BYE"||method=="CANCEL") { setflag(2); acc_rad_request("200"); unforce_rtp_proxy(); }; if(!lookup("location")) { log("LOG:- NOT IN LOCATION \n"); sl_send_reply("404","sorry guy ... urs friend Not found"); exit; }; }; lookup("aliases"); # if (!uri==myself) { # log("LOG:_ uri in uri myself \n"); # append_hf("P-hint: outbound alias\r\n"); # route(1); # }; if(!t_relay()) { sl_reply_error(); }; # lookup("aliases"); # exit; route(1); # exit; } route[1] { log("LOG:- ENeter into route 1\n"); if(isflagset(6)) { force_rtp_proxy(); }; t_on_reply("1"); if(!t_relay()) { sl_reply_error(); }; } onreply_route[1] { log("LOG :- reply_route \n"); if(status=~"2[0-9][0-9]" && isflagset(6)) { log("LOG:- staus 183| 200 \n"); fix_nated_contact(); force_rtp_proxy(); }; } -- Thanks and Regards with cheers Sunkara Ravi Prakash (Voip Developer) Hyperion Technology www.hyperion-tech.com <b>

2 1

[Users] Problems with reverse DNS resolving in comp_ip
by Andreas Sikkema 26 Jun '06

26 Jun '06

Hi, Today we had an issue on one of our openser machines. Some CPEs that were trying to register came from an IP address that for some reason would not (or very slowly, or both) resolve to a DNS name. Therefore openser was very slow to respond to any incoming SIP message, resulting in loads of unreachable customers. About one third of the registration attempts was succeeding and I think hardly any call attempts succeeded. What lead us to the DNS problem was that we increased the loglevel from 3 (our normal loglevel) to 7 and we noticed lots of "comp_ip: could not rev_resolve ip address xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx" messages. Why is the function eval_elem() in route.c calling comp_ip which in turn wants to resolve an ip address? Is it really necessary? Naturally I will try to find out why the dns resolver was taking so long, but I'm having trouble finding out from the source why resolving an ip address is necessary. Thanks! -- Andreas (who's very sleepy, it took quite a while to figure this one out)

2 1

[Users] UA not receiving BYE from SPA 3000
by Kenny Chua 26 Jun '06

26 Jun '06

I'm currently having this problem: SPA 3000 calls UA(xlite). The call goes through and everything is fine. When SPA 3000 hangs up. UA never hangs up. Seems like its not receiving the BYE. However, if the UA hangs up, everything is fine. This is some error I get: localhost /usr/local/sbin/openser[3236]: ERROR: t_newtran: transaction already in process 0xb62f1980 Jun 23 23:07:43 localhost /usr/local/sbin/openser[3236]: ERROR: sl_reply_error used: I'm terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL) This is how I handle my BYE in openser.cfg: if (method=="BYE" || method=="CANCEL") { unforce_rtp_proxy(); t_relay(); }; if (loose_route()) { if ((method=="INVITE" || method=="REFER") && !has_totag()) { sl_send_reply("403", "Forbidden"); return; }; if (method=="INVITE") { if (!proxy_authorize("","subscriber")) { proxy_challenge("","0"); return; } else if (!check_from()) { sl_send_reply("403", "Use From=ID"); return; }; consume_credentials(); if (nat_uac_test("19")) { setflag(6); force_rport(); fix_nated_contact(); }; force_rtp_proxy("l"); }; t_relay(); route(1); return; }; I'm using rtpproxy on the same system. Any ideas how to fix this issue? Also, I was wondering how do I set rtpproxy to start on startup? Thank you --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups gets better. Check out the new email design. Plus theres much more to come.

2 1

R: [Users] difference between return, break and exit.
by D'Addelfio Davide 26 Jun '06

26 Jun '06

Thanks for quick reply. Do you think in this case is bettr to use return or break function? if (method=="INVITE") { route(7); return; } else if (method=="ACK") { route(8); return; } else if (method=="CANCEL") { route(9); return; } else if (method=="BYE") { route(10); return; }; if (loose_route()) { xlog("L_INFO","Eseguo loose_route"); # mark routing logic in request append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n"); route(1); return; }; if (uri==myself) { if (method=="REGISTER") { # Uncomment this if you want to use digest authentication #if (!www_authorize("138.132.167.240", "subscriber")) { # www_challenge("138.132.167.240", "0"); # exit; #}; save("location"); #exit; return; }; }; Thanks Davide ________________________________ Da: raviprakash sunkara [mailto:sunkara.raviprakash.feb14@gmail.com] Inviato: lunedì 26 giugno 2006 14.21 A: D'Addelfio Davide Oggetto: Re: [Users] difference between return, break and exit. Hi Davide , openser 0.9 is having the break,,, now in 1.0.1 and 1.1.0 is using.... now.. return is also used ... But the difference b/n the return and exit.. is In retuern the function is + ve or - ve return type.. where exit .... to gettinh out the condition function; bettter to use only exit function... On 6/26/06, D'Addelfio Davide <Davide.D'Addelfio(a)italtel-consultant.com> wrote: Hi to all, i need to understand the difference in usage between return, break and exit. Could someone help me, maybe with some example? Thanks Davide _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users -- Thanks and Regards with cheers Sunkara Ravi Prakash (Voip Developer) Hyperion Technology www.hyperion-tech.com

2 1

[Users] CANCEL
by D'Addelfio Davide 26 Jun '06

26 Jun '06

Hi to all, i can't understand why my openser doesn't capture the Cancel and doesn't store it into database, could anyone help me in some way? Please, I'm desperate...!!! Attached my cfg file. Thanks Davide

3 2

[Serusers] P-Asserted-Identity
by Dani Popa 26 Jun '06

26 Jun '06

Hi, How can i add P-Asserted-Identity with an external application ? Any ideeas ? thanks in advance. Dani

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