- sr-users - kamailio.org

siputils add_uri_param not available in KEMI python3
by Patrick Murphy 15 May '19

15 May '19

Hello, I am using the following version of Kamailio and using app_python3 with KEMI but I cannot find any exported function of add_uri_param from the siputils module. Any idea how I can perform: KSR.siputils.add_uri_param("name=value") ? version: kamailio 5.2.2 (x86_64/linux) 9260a2 Cheers, Pat.

1 1

Using a single virtual domain in a multi-domain setup
by Rhys Hanrahan 15 May '19

15 May '19

Hi All, I am trying to setup Kamailio to allow me to have multiple different domains (and IPs) treated as one. I am using the domain module for this. As an example I have: * A handset registered to Kamailio by IP address. * A SIP trunk between Asterisk and Kamilio using an FQDN that uses SRV records for redundancy on Asterisk's side. I have added all domains and IPs under the same "domain identifier". It seems the "old" domain module now uid_domain had this capability of a single virtual domain, but is this possible with the more current domain.so module? From what I've said the uid_* modules older modules from the SIP Router project, and should be replaced by more recent Kamailio modules? - https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/5.0.x/modules/uid_domain.html VS. - https://kamailio.org/docs/modules/5.1.x/modules/domain.html MariaDB [kamailio]> select * from domain; +----+------------------------------------+------------+---------------------+ | id | domain | did | last_modified | +----+------------------------------------+------------+---------------------+ | 1 | 12.34.56.53 | vocalpoint | 2000-01-01 00:00:01 | | 2 | 23.34.56.54 | vocalpoint | 2000-01-01 00:00:01 | | 3 | sbc.foo | vocalpoint | 2000-01-01 00:00:01 | | 4 | sbc.nsw.foo | vocalpoint | 2000-01-01 00:00:01 | | 5 | sbc.vic.foo | vocalpoint | 2000-01-01 00:00:01 | | 6 | sbc.foo2 | vocalpoint | 2000-01-01 00:00:01 | | 7 | sbc.nsw.foo2 | vocalpoint | 2000-01-01 00:00:01 | | 8 | sbc.vic.foo2 | vocalpoint | 2000-01-01 00:00:01 | +----+------------------------------------+------------+---------------------+ 8 rows in set (0.000 sec) I managed to get registrations working by hardcoding a static realm in the config, but when when usrloc does a lookup on a handset, Kamailio can't find user(a)sbc.nsw.foo and Kamailio returns 404. It looks like this is because in the locations table it is listed with a domain of 12.34.56.53 (because the handset is registered by IP). How should this work normally? Or is it even possible? Thanks, Rhys.

2 4

Sip proxy for Asterisk with RFC3966 and 100Rel
by paolo.visnoviz＠vipcomputers.it 15 May '19

15 May '19

Dear Sirs, a telco provider give us a trunk that require 100rel and TEL RFC 3966. Usually we use Asterisk. Now Asterisk 16 with PJSIP support 100Rel, but not RFC3966, and they don't actually works to implement it. Asterisk chan_sip, instead, support RFC3966, but not 100Rel and is not actively developed on by Digium or Sangoma. So I'm stuck. Now, do you think it was possible to use Kamailio to act like a proxy sip but implementing RFC3966 for incoming and outgoing calls and RFC3966 and 100Rel for outgoing calls? And it is possible to connect all to an Asterisk server? Thank you in advance Best regards. Paolo Visnoviz

3 9

Possible memory leak in siptrace module in kamailio 5.1/5.2
by davy van de moere 15 May '19

15 May '19

Dear, I'm using siptrace within a python handler in the KEMI framework. KSR.siptrace.sip_trace_dst("sip:<myhomerip>:9060") I notice an ever increasing usage of memory, until the system runs out of memory. (definition of a memory leak :) ). Looking at the memory information kamailio is giving me I notice this: May 14 05:49:48 server kamailio[36452]: NOTICE: PYT {INVITE} {1769595029-1513210001-1955500877} {1} : qm_sums: count= 79286 size= 5812048 bytes from siptrace: siptrace.c: ki_sip_trace_dst_cid(729) May 14 05:51:17 server kamailio[36452]: NOTICE: PYT {REGISTER} { 4_1419955802(a)192.168.0.153} {2582} : qm_sums: count= 79335 size= 5814840 bytes from siptrace: siptrace.c: ki_sip_trace_dst_cid(729) I notice this on kamailio 5.1.8 (from a debian repo), and on kamailio 5.2.2 (from source). I can reproduce the problem very easily, and I can apply patches in the source to try out things. Could I be wrongly using siptrace? Can I give you more debugging info? Kind regards, Davy

3 4

define a DBURL with SLQOPS fails
by David Villasmil 14 May '19

14 May '19

Hello guys, So, i'm defining: DBURL "mysql://user:password@dbhost/dbname" and later on... modparam("sqlops","sqlcon","cb=>"DBURL) and this fails miserably.. What do do on this case? Thanks all! Regards, David Villasmil email: david.villasmil.work(a)gmail.com phone: +34669448337

3 12

Npdi question
by Duarte Rocha 14 May '19

14 May '19

Greetings, Regarding portability issues, is there a difference between "npdi" and "npdi=yes" ? Are there any more possible values besides "yes" and no value? Best Regards, Duarte Rocha

1 0

sdp_remove_codecs_by_id does not remove 101
by Juha Heinanen 14 May '19

14 May '19

I tried to use sdp_remove_codecs_by_id("101") to remove "codec" 101 (dtmf) from sdp, but nothing happened. It is still there: m=audio 31128 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVPF 101 96. c=IN IP4 192.168.43.88 a=label:1. a=rtcp-rsize. a=ssrc:2880178656 cname:sip:test@test.tutpro.com. a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000. a=rtpmap:96 opus/48000/2. a=fmtp:101 0-15. Is that by design or a bug? If not a bug, is there some other means to remove 101? -- Juha

2 2

sip trunk with kamailio
by arish haque 14 May '19

14 May '19

Hi, I am trying the SIP trunk from kamailio with following configurations - cfg_get.pstn.gw_ip="10.0.x.y route[PSTN] { #!ifdef WITH_PSTN # check if PSTN GW IP is defined if (strempty($sel(cfg_get.pstn.gw_ip))) { xlog("SCRIPT: PSTN rotuing enabled but pstn.gw_ip not defined\n"); return; } if(!($rU=~"^(\+|00)918884978235")) return; # only local users allowed to call if(from_uri!=myself) { sl_send_reply("403", "Not Allowed"); exit; } $ru = "sip:" + $rU + "@" + $sel(cfg_get.pstn.gw_ip); route(RELAY); exit; #!endif return; } I am able to see kamailio sending INVITE to SIP Provider but no response back. Any other, configuration is required which I'm missing. I have attached the tcpdump snapshot of the above scenario. Thanks, Arish

2 1

Theoritical Anycast Setup
by Daniel Oakes 14 May '19

14 May '19

Hi there, Long time user, 1st time poster - apologies if someone has posted this previously. We have a product from a vendor that utilizes Kamailio as a SIP router - but we're wanting to extend it a little bit by the use of anycast (we're a small ISP). Basically the scenario is that we want to utilize Quagga via BGP to anycast an address, which addresses a glaring load balancing issue with have with people who use only A records. Problem is anycast doesn't work so well in this scenario, just by adding the Anycast as a listen address on the proxy. What we'd want to do is rewrite the SIP so that all responses come back out saying to use the 'real ip'. So I have two variables - say REAL_IP_ADDRESS and ANYCAST_IP_ADDRESS - request will come in via ANYCAST, but I want all responses from then on to be via REAL_IP_ADDRESS. We have six Kamailio boxes in various geographical locations, so the idea is they hit one based on closest, and we rewrite it so they end up with the real ip address to talk to. Anyone done something similar? I'm guessing possibly, but I can't find anything specific enough for me to use. Help appreciated! Regards, Daniel

2 1

No audio after IP address change
by Chris Scheid 11 May '19

11 May '19

Hi, we are using rtpengine with Kamailio using DTLS-SRTP and SRTP making audio calls from two Android devices. Regular audio calls work fine but we have issues with the following scenario: 1. Device 1 (72.66.83.8, on WiFI) calls Device 2 (174.204.14.29). SIP server has IP 209.182.216.71. 2. Device 2 switches networks from WiFI to 3G (new IP: 97.47.70.223). Re-invite flow completes. 3. Any audio from Device 2 cannot be heard on Device 1. But audio from the Device1 can be heard on the Device 2. In the rtpengine stats I see that there were some packets sent from the SIP server to the Device 1 after network change: [1557513316.000308] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: ------ Media #1 (audio over UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP) using iLBC/8000 [1557513316.000318] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: --------- Port 209.182.216.71:20052 <> 97.47.70.223:4667 , SSRC 77c38349, 55 p, 3410 b, 0 e, 32 ts [1557513316.000325] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: --------- Port 209.182.216.71:20053 <> 97.47.70.223:4640 (RTCP), SSRC 77c38349, 12 p, 1120 b, However, in my UDP trace, I don't see any communication between the SIP server and the Device 1 after network change (IP 97.47.70.223). This seems to be the reason why we don't get audio on Device 1. I'm looking for direction on how to troubleshoot this issue. I'm not so familiar with rtpengine. Any assistance greatly appreciated. Thanks! RTP Engine Config: [rtpengine] #####table = 0 listen-ng = 127.0.0.1:5050 timeout = 60 silent-timeout = 3600 tos = 184 port-min = 20000 port-max = 60000 interface = 209.182.216.71 log-level = 7 log-stderr = false log-facility = local0 START CALL --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [1557513231.973294] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Received command 'offer' from 127.0.0.1:45431 [1557513231.973357] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Dump for 'offer' from 127.0.0.1:45431: { "sdp": "v=0 o=- 3766502030 3766502030 IN IP4 192.168.1.200 s=pjmedia b=AS:84 t=0 0 a=X-nat:0 m=audio 5095 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 104 98 97 99 3 0 8 9 96 c=IN IP4 192.168.1.200 b=TIAS:64000 a=rtcp:5096 IN IP4 192.168.1.200 a=sendrecv a=rtpmap:104 iLBC/8000 a=fmtp:104 mode=30 a=rtpmap:98 speex/16000 a=rtpmap:97 speex/8000 a=rtpmap:99 speex/32000 a=rtpmap:3 GSM/8000 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000 a=rtpmap:9 G722/8000 a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:96 0-16 a=ssrc:2009301833 cname:32ababda5d2c847b a=setup:actpass a=fingerprint:SHA-256 4F:69:B6:89:51:98:6C:A4:63:CF:F7:CD:22:D2:BE:FD:6E:3F:F4:2A:8B:39:AD:E4:C0:8D:AE:BD:A3:70:12:49 ", "ICE": "remove", "DTLS": "passive", "replace": [ "origin", "session-connection" ], "transport-protocol": "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP", "call-id": "05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9 799-0557b76cc340", "received-from": [ "IP4", "72.66.83.8" ], "from-tag": "2684eff8-3602-41ed-aca2-9f7938362462", "command": "offer" } [1557513231.973444] NOTICE: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating new call [1557513231.973496] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Default sink codec is speex/16000 [1557513231.973503] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for iLBC/8000 [1557513231.973508] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for speex/16000 [1557513231.973512] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec speex/16000 [1557513231.973515] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for speex/8000 [1557513231.973519] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec speex/8000 [1557513231.973523] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for speex/32000 [1557513231.973526] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec speex/32000 [1557513231.973530] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for GSM/8000 [1557513231.973534] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec GSM/8000 [1557513231.973538] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for PCMU/8000 [1557513231.973542] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec PCMU/8000 [1557513231.973545] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for PCMA/8000 [1557513231.973549] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec PCMA/8000 [1557513231.973545] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for PCMA/8000 [1557513231.973549] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec PCMA/8000 [1557513231.973552] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for G722/8000 [1557513231.973556] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec G722/8000 [1557513231.973560] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for telephone-event/8000 [1557513231.974291] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: set FILLED flag for stream 192.168.1.200:5095 [1557513231.974561] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: set FILLED flag for stream 192.168.1.200:5096 [1557513231.974874] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: offer time = 0.001488 sec [1557513231.974882] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Replying to 'offer' from 127.0.0.1:45431 [1557513231.974900] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Response dump for 'offer' to 127.0.0.1:45431: { "sdp": "v=0 o=- 3766502030 3766502030 IN IP4 209.182.216.71 s=pjmedia b=AS:84 t=0 0 a=X-nat:0 m=audio 20032 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 104 98 97 99 3 0 8 9 96 c=IN IP4 209.182.216.71 b=TIAS:64000 a=ssrc:2009301833 cname:32ababda5d2c847b a=rtpmap:104 iLBC/8000 a=rtpmap:98 speex/16000 a=rtpmap:97 speex/8000 a=rtpmap:99 speex/32000 a=rtpmap:3 GSM/8000 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000 a=rtpmap:9 G722/8000 a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:104 mode=30 a=fmtp:96 0-16 a=sendrecv a=rtcp:20033 a=crypto:1 AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80 inline:G9MvyRPBAVFsrMypvr1EAunZiX/vc04sXEq4mXvl a=setup:actpass a=fingerprint:sha-1 EE:4A:ED:7D:5A:94:A2:FF:F2:09:64:07:41:FC:15:80:D3:F9:C0:B4 ", "result": "ok" } [1557513232.077386] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: Processing incoming DTLS packet [1557513232.078219] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: Sending DTLS packet [1557513232.189220] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: Processing incoming DTLS packet [1557513232.189868] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: DTLS handshake successful [1557513232.189899] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: DTLS-SRTP successfully negotiated [1557513232.189905] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: SRTP keys, incoming: [1557513232.189914] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: --- AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80 key q67B3h3GP/dhbQeKsgBnvA== salt EcoNJ6Hqj0lRtvZ8Z+Y= [1557513232.189919] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: SRTP keys, outgoing: [1557513232.189923] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: --- AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80 key 0nTo2gy4XJ2GXlroyyH6nA== salt fbIfUIa4IPiYLvn5CkI= [1557513232.189929] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: Sending DTLS packet confirmed [1557513243.648460] ERR: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: SRTCP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated [1557513243.648486] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513243.648496] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: RR from 779d978b about 9fda818d: FL 205 TL 6486816 HSR 613804890 J 3100337071 LSR 1419186059 DLSR 531075031 [1557513243.648505] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513243.649142] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513243.649158] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: RR from 779d978b about d4b1278d: FL 23 TL 2271802 HSR 278642673 J 2408385537 LSR 3 653820601 DLSR 1701759944 [1557513243.649169] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513243.777813] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Received command 'answer' from 127.0.0.1:47861 [1557513243.777860] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Dump for 'answer' from 127.0.0.1:47861: { "sdp": "v=0 o=- 3766502031 3766502032 IN IP4 100.81.62.76 s=pjmedia b=AS:84 t=0 0 a=X-nat:0 m=audio 5079 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 104 96 c=IN IP4 100.81.62.76 b=TIAS:64000 a=rtcp:5080 IN IP4 100.81.62.76 a=sendrecv a=rtpmap:104 iLBC/8000 a=fmtp:104 mode=30 a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:96 0-16 a=ssrc:2006816651 cname:1c0965113e9b1046 a=setup:active a=fingerprint:SHA-256 AD:2D:0F:A6:11:DD:75:CC:3C:50:3A:9A:F0:29:20:8D:95:BC:3E:2A:A0:34:F6:67:14:A7:87:EB:8D:66:77:B1 ", "ICE": "remove", "replace": [ "origin", "session-connection" ], "transport-protocol": "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP", "call-id": "05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340", "received-from": [ "IP4", "174.204.14.29" ], "from-tag": "2684eff8-3602-41ed-aca2-9f7938362462", "to-tag": "c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00", "command": "a nswer" } [1557513243.777998] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for iLBC/8000 [1557513243.778010] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Creating codec handler for telephone-event/8000 [1557513243.778088] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: set FILLED flag for stream 100.81.62.76:5079 [1557513243.778117] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: DTLS: Peer certificate accepted [1557513243.778123] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: set FILLED flag for stream 100.81.62.76:5080 [1557513243.778166] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: answer time = 0.000267 sec [1557513243.778175] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Replying to 'answer' from 127.0.0.1:47861 [1557513243.778187] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Response dump for 'answer' to 127.0.0.1:47861: { "sdp": "v=0 o=- 3766502031 3766502032 IN IP4 209.182.216.71 s=pjmedia b=AS:84 t=0 0 a=X-nat:0 m=audio 20052 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 104 96 c=IN IP4 209.182.216.71 b=TIAS:64000 a=ssrc:2006816651 cname:1c0965113e9b1046 a=rtpmap:104 iLBC/8000 a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:104 mode=30 a=fmtp:96 0-16 a=sendrecv a=rtcp:20053 a=setup:passive a=fingerprint:sha-1 EE:4A:ED:7D:5A:94:A2:FF:F2:09:64:07:41:FC:15:80:D3:F9:C0:B4 ", "result": "ok" } [1557513243.864786] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Processing incoming DTLS packet [1557513243.865568] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Sending DTLS packet [1557513243.912858] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Processing incoming DTLS packet [1557513243.913111] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: DTLS: Peer certificate accepted [1557513243.913627] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: DTLS handshake successful [1557513243.913668] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: DTLS-SRTP successfully negotiated [1557513243.913675] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: SRTP keys, incoming: [1557513243.913682] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: --- AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80 key +C2ck1NPvsfHYoKflimqaA== salt xM4aFoL60/ePpmQJsT8= [1557513243.913686] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: SRTP keys, outgoing: [1557513243.913689] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: --- AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80 key VvTNUyescFh+vNj16/fePw== salt m3EuTJjAesJHaSXfqKU= [1557513243.913694] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Sending DTLS packet [1557513244.475362] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513244.475405] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 3873048209 PC 2516599107 OC 673505029 NTP TS 1161195675/4 008032614=1161195675.933193 [1557513244.475412] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: RR from 779d978b about bb94938e: FL 243 TL 11665253 HSR 1302964504 J 2830082235 LS R 1964993324 DLSR 1625750139 [1557513244.475422] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513244.492749] ERR: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SRTCP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated [1557513244.492775] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513244.492791] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 2981125880 PC 4052113656 OC 2653921327 NTP TS 4076801750/ 1160081551=4076801750.270103 [1557513244.492797] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about 3813d27e: FL 75 TL 11393233 HSR 1719559869 J 944495881 LSR 790240102 DLSR 447292567 [1557513244.492804] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513247.217290] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20032]: Confirmed peer address as 174.204.14.29:10523 [1557513248.958592] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513248.958638] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 3148803183 PC 137367242 OC 1506652935 NTP TS 3606800652/1 621372750=3606800652.377505 [1557513248.958647] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: RR from 779d978b about 468fa6ae: FL 57 TL 15596558 HSR 3764947872 J 3769875796 LSR 4259175195 DLSR 3903464346 [1557513248.958657] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513248.958667] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Confirmed peer address as 174.204.14.29:10496 i[1557513249.259063] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513249.259108] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 3424021083 PC 3823893658 OC 584056375 NTP TS 3244065141/3 391763074=3244065141.789706 [1557513249.259117] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about e7313af6: FL 98 TL 10263186 HSR 2762600672 J 838876573 LSR 3367219470 DLSR 50549698 [1557513249.259131] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513249.259142] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Confirmed peer address as 72.66.83.8:5096 t[1557513249.562239] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Confirmed peer address as 72.66.83.8:5095 SWITCH NETWORKS [1557513253.843937] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513253.844019] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 1364757765 PC 1063357287 OC 2194907961 NTP TS 2472417766/ 1884000851=2472417766.438653 [1557513253.844029] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: RR from 779d978b about 77b8933: FL 163 TL 2305413 HSR 2377964402 J 118139039 LSR 2 460485565 DLSR 3416921415 [1557513253.844040] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513254.590466] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513254.590508] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 2527484095 PC 1878948628 OC 3882176963 NTP TS 213338522/6 38146641=213338522.148580 [1557513254.590517] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about b7800717: FL 93 TL 16503124 HSR 338254320 J 1043490285 LSR 801212789 DLSR 2849120558 [1557513254.590530] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513258.679347] ERR: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: SRTCP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated [1557513258.679385] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513258.679411] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 1747525463 PC 239751946 OC 2859161225 NTP TS 3835334254/3 577221347=3835334254.832887 [1557513258.679418] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: RR from 779d978b about e03bd142: FL 40 TL 11515285 HSR 3870936491 J 4150119236 LSR 2903910302 DLSR 700479064 [1557513258.679427] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513259.940740] ERR: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SRTCP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated [1557513259.940770] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513259.940793] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 2745657868 PC 580822102 OC 4072320279 NTP TS 252333929/20 93935903=252333929.487532 [1557513259.940801] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about 476ec510: FL 61 TL 5399464 HSR 3682903462 J 1600791504 LSR 497094189 DLSR 826539320 [1557513259.940814] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513263.532695] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513263.532722] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 301750475 PC 2434799802 OC 863475295 NTP TS 3625503376/30 14095725=3625503376.701774 [1557513263.532729] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: RR from 779d978b about 228989b7: FL 148 TL 10638176 HSR 2137788972 J 2678688015 LS R 2118438561 DLSR 1024262683 [1557513263.532738] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513264.051305] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513264.051352] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 1190725747 PC 3072491822 OC 537479863 NTP TS 817717026/42 82321058=817717026.997056 [1557513264.051359] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about 920db8ff: FL 98 TL 6598240 HSR 2045142812 J 3171281598 LSR 2224002690 DLSR 2514604823 [1557513264.051369] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513264.058891] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513264.058920] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about 5c8f2711: FL 24 TL 1700303 HSR 2993289918 J 618517078 LSR 1 835926259 DLSR 3106454771 [1557513264.058891] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513264.058920] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about 5c8f2711: FL 24 TL 1700303 HSR 2993289918 J 618517078 LSR 1 835926259 DLSR 3106454771 [1557513264.058934] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513264.266612] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Received command 'offer' from 127.0.0.1:60736 [1557513264.266654] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Dump for 'offer' from 127.0.0.1:60736: { "sdp": "v=0 o=- 3766502030 3766502031 IN IP4 192.168.1.200 s=pjmedia b=AS:84 t=0 0 a=X-nat:0 m=audio 5097 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 104 98 97 99 3 0 8 9 96 c=IN IP4 10.255.81.66 b=TIAS:64000 a=rtcp:5098 IN IP4 10.255.81.66 a=sendrecv a=rtpmap:104 iLBC/8000 a=fmtp:104 mode=30 a=rtpmap:98 speex/16000 a=rtpmap:97 speex/8000 a=rtpmap:99 speex/32000 a=rtpmap:3 GSM/8000 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000 a=rtpmap:9 G722/8000 a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:96 0-16 a=ssrc:2009301833 cname:32ababda5d2c847b a=setup:actpass a=fingerprint:SHA-256 4F:69:B6:89:51:98:6C:A4:63:CF:F7:CD:22:D2:BE:FD:6E:3F:F4:2A:8B:39:AD:E4:C0:8D:AE:BD:A3:70:12:49 ", "ICE": "remove", "DTLS": "passive", "replace": [ "origin", "session-connection" ], "transport-protocol": "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP", "call-id": "05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9 799-0557b76cc340", "received-from": [ "IP4", "97.47.70.223" ], "from-tag": "2684eff8-3602-41ed-aca2-9f7938362462", "to-tag": "c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d 00", "command": "offer" } [1557513264.266814] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Default sink codec is speex/16000 [1557513264.266826] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec speex/16000 [1557513264.266831] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec speex/8000 [1557513264.266835] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec speex/32000 [1557513264.266838] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec GSM/8000 [1557513264.266842] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec PCMU/8000 [1557513264.266846] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec PCMA/8000 [1557513264.266850] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sink supports codec G722/8000 [1557513264.267614] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sending DTLS packet [1557513264.268089] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sending DTLS packet [1557513264.268146] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sending DTLS packet [1557513264.268220] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: set FILLED flag for stream 10.255.81.66:5097 [1557513264.268627] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: set FILLED flag for stream 10.255.81.66:5098 [1557513264.269072] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: offer time = 0.002384 sec [1557513264.269084] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Replying to 'offer' from 127.0.0.1:60736 [1557513264.269098] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Response dump for 'offer' to 127.0.0.1:60736: { "sdp": "v=0 o=- 3766502030 3766502031 IN IP4 209.182.216.71 s=pjmedia b=AS:84 t=0 0 a=X-nat:0 m=audio 20064 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 104 98 97 99 3 0 8 9 96 c=IN IP4 209.182.216.71 b=TIAS:64000 a=ssrc:2009301833 cname:32ababda5d2c847b a=rtpmap:104 iLBC/8000 a=rtpmap:98 speex/16000 a=rtpmap:97 speex/8000 a=rtpmap:99 speex/32000 a=rtpmap:3 GSM/8000 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000 a=rtpmap:9 G722/8000 a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:104 mode=30 a=fmtp:96 0-16 a=sendrecv a=rtcp:20065 a=setup:actpass a=fingerprint:sha-1 EE:4A:ED:7D:5A:94:A2:FF:F2:09:64:07:41:FC:15:80:D3:F9:C0:B4 ", "result": "ok" } [1557513264.355109] ERR: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SRTCP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated [1557513264.355140] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513264.355150] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: RR from 779d978b about 511a36de: FL 144 TL 3729734 HSR 2556650506 J 4034165594 LSR 900570716 DLSR 3118967760 [1557513264.355166] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513264.355186] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513264.355193] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: RR from 779d978b about aea81208: FL 180 TL 10378624 HSR 1586287909 J 2246375086 LS R 3231023203 DLSR 4073439206 [1557513264.355201] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513264.355210] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Switching local interface to 209.182.216.71:20033 [1557513264.358206] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513264.358229] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: RR from 779d978b about b59d47bc: FL 242 TL 13886413 HSR 3966401064 J 2679493971 LS R 3040876731 DLSR 2668321392 [1557513264.358239] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20033]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513264.358262] ERR: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20064]: SRTP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated [1557513264.425636] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Received command 'answer' from 127.0.0.1:45431 [1557513264.425679] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Dump for 'answer' from 127.0.0.1:45431: { "sdp": "v=0 o=- 3766502031 3766502033 IN IP4 100.81.62.76 s=pjmedia b=AS:84 t=0 0 a=X-nat:0 m=audio 5079 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 104 96 c=IN IP4 100.81.62.76 b=TIAS:64000 a=rtcp:5080 IN IP4 100.81.62.76 a=sendrecv a=rtpmap:104 iLBC/8000 a=rtpmap:104 iLBC/8000 a=fmtp:104 mode=30 a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:96 0-16 a=ssrc:2006816651 cname:1c0965113e9b1046 a=setup:active a=fingerprint:SHA-256 AD:2D:0F:A6:11:DD:75:CC:3C:50:3A:9A:F0:29:20:8D:95:BC:3E:2A:A0:34:F6:67:14:A7:87:EB:8D:66:77:B1 ", "ICE": "remove", "replace": [ "origin", "session-connection" ], "transport-protocol": "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP", "call-id": "05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340", "received-from": [ "IP4", "174.204.14.29" ], "from-tag": "2684eff8-3602-41ed-aca2-9f7938362462", "to-tag": "c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00", "command": "a nswer" } [1557513264.426806] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: answer time = 0.001099 sec [1557513264.426820] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Replying to 'answer' from 127.0.0.1:45431 [1557513264.426831] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Response dump for 'answer' to 127.0.0.1:45431: { "sdp": "v=0 o=- 3766502031 3766502033 IN IP4 209.182.216.71 s=pjmedia b=AS:84 t=0 0 a=X-nat:0 m=audio 20052 UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP 104 96 c=IN IP4 209.182.216.71 b=TIAS:64000 a=ssrc:2006816651 cname:1c0965113e9b1046 a=rtpmap:104 iLBC/8000 a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:104 mode=30 a=fmtp:96 0-16 a=sendrecv a=rtcp:20053 a=setup:passive a=fingerprint:sha-1 EE:4A:ED:7D:5A:94:A2:FF:F2:09:64:07:41:FC:15:80:D3:F9:C0:B4 ", "result": "ok" } [1557513264.700442] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Processing incoming DTLS packet [1557513264.701235] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Sending DTLS packet [1557513264.892393] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Processing incoming DTLS packet [1557513264.893153] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: DTLS handshake successful [1557513264.893193] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: DTLS-SRTP successfully negotiated [1557513264.893202] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: SRTP keys, incoming: [1557513264.893211] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: --- AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80 key dob4sywpHJJ8qNgFzemlzQ== salt y7/1RgzeAtPkG+GfMLI= [1557513264.893216] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: SRTP keys, outgoing: [1557513264.893222] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: --- AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80 key ontM1nC56XojOkmzb8520g== salt Hom6TrHovUBUaF1g6Iw= [1557513264.893228] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Sending DTLS packet [1557513269.223923] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20052]: Confirmed peer address as 97.47.70.223:4667 [1557513269.337491] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513269.337543] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 402044265 PC 1976845075 OC 2962195809 NTP TS 1329245270/2 977782988=1329245270.693319 [1557513269.337552] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about c1e9445b: FL 196 TL 15740765 HSR 1231260891 J 3373413243 LS R 2989889476 DLSR 1721296716 [1557513269.337562] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513269.337571] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Confirmed peer address as 97.47.70.223:4640 [1557513269.355712] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513269.355744] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 46888194 PC 1178262997 OC 1943197043 NTP TS 748304878/374 [1557513269.355749] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: RR from 779d978b about 4d78530a: FL 59 TL 15587360 HSR 641166863 J 455122196 LSR 2 981586141 DLSR 1538485973 [1557513269.355755] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513269.355763] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Confirmed peer address as 174.204.14.29:10496 [1557513269.355768] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Switching local interface to 209.182.216.71:20065 [1557513269.376119] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513269.376149] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: RR from 779d978b about 60b442ee: FL 185 TL 2381849 HSR 1868471658 J 3454737373 LSR 3540730944 DLSR 753951698 [1557513269.376164] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513269.967467] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20064]: Confirmed peer address as 174.204.14.29:10523 s[1557513274.064040] ERR: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SRTCP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated [1557513274.064063] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513274.064084] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 2043506601 PC 348629863 OC 1509649344 NTP TS 4002640369/1 330623176=4002640369.309810 [1557513274.064090] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about 1b7ce7ec: FL 17 TL 10773844 HSR 2006802227 J 3496394774 LSR 1855863287 DLSR 207902258 [1557513274.064105] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add 1b7ce7ec) - deleting SSRC 9fda8 18d [1557513274.064114] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding w[1557513274.337285] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513274.337341] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 3588538011 PC 4113250253 OC 3762757735 NTP TS 3675530209/ 2088363704=3675530209.486235 [1557513274.337352] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: RR from 779d978b about 1904c0d9: FL 190 TL 1277330 HSR 3700606795 J 2076634040 LSR 2826708796 DLSR 3084916091 [1557513274.337367] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add 1904c0d9) - deleting SSRC d4b12 78d [1557513274.337378] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding itch complete[1557513278.796840] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513278.796890] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 1179546147 PC 253436483 OC 401514196 NTP TS 591585900/307 4094117=591585900.715743 [1557513278.796900] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about f25fab39: FL 196 TL 1861219 HSR 1237831119 J 2726348211 LSR 3841137799 DLSR 843496811 [1557513278.796913] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add f25fab39) - deleting SSRC bb949 38e [1557513278.796921] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513279.310594] ERR: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SRTCP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated [1557513279.310626] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513279.310646] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 624630617 PC 1167418798 OC 2870042862 NTP TS 2807429790/9 64181525=2807429790.224491 [1557513279.310652] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: RR from 779d978b about bb84140b: FL 193 TL 5406510 HSR 1470777656 J 207786249 LSR 3684806947 DLSR 307709608 [1557513279.310669] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add bb84140b) - deleting SSRC 3813d 27e [1557513279.310679] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513279.678189] ERR: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20064]: SRTP output wanted, but no crypto suite was negotiated [1557513283.537471] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513283.537514] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 1085702245 PC 129819128 OC 1350967259 NTP TS 967851883/21 63508869=967851883.503731 [1557513283.537521] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about 169e1507: FL 46 TL 3777017 HSR 3092777669 J 3495001522 LSR 3630093505 DLSR 120738828 [1557513283.537537] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add 169e1507) - deleting SSRC 468fa 6ae [1557513283.537546] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513284.300047] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513284.300094] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 3660274611 PC 3339904092 OC 976632286 NTP TS 3250964209/2 354170892=3250964209.548123 [1557513284.300103] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: RR from 779d978b about a9cab1ac: FL 9 TL 7152183 HSR 1071025251 J 612018816 LSR 12 43749409 DLSR 721434160 [1557513284.300119] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add a9cab1ac) - deleting SSRC e7313 af6 [1557513284.300130] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding bye [1557513286.941239] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Received command 'delete' from 127.0.0.1:49479 [1557513286.941278] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Dump for 'delete' from 127.0.0.1:49479: { "call-id": "05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340", "received-from": [ "IP4", "174.204.14.29" ], "from-tag": "c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00", "command": "delete" } [1557513286.941434] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Scheduling deletion of call branch 'c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00' (via-branch '') in 3 0 seconds [1557513286.941444] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: delete time = 0.000152 sec [1557513286.941474] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Replying to 'delete' from 127.0.0.1:49479 [1557513286.941618] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Response dump for 'delete' to 127.0.0.1:49479: { "created": 1557513231, "created_us": 973175, "last signal": 1557513264, "SSRC": { "3046983612": { }, "2450372863": { }, "1622426350": { }, "2930250248": { }, "419741913": { }, "579439031": { }, "136 0672478": { }, "3145995275": { }, "125536563": { }, "2848633260": { }, "3762016578": { }, "379458823": { }, "1552885521": { }, "3078620951": { }, "12997 31210": { }, "461170668": { }, "2009301833": { }, "3253290075": { }, "1198441744": { }, "4066356025": { }, "2006816651": { } }, "tags": { "c71ac9de-9bf5- 4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00": { "tag": "c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00", "created": 1557513231, "in dialogue with": "2684eff8-3602-41ed-aca2-9f7938362462", "me dias": [ { "index": 1, "type": "audio", "protocol": "UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP", "streams": [ { "local port": 20064, "endpoint": { "family": "IPv4", "address": "174.204. 14.29", "port": 10523 }, "advertised endpoint": { "family": "IPv4", "address": "100.81.62.76", "port": 5079 }, "crypto suite": "AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80", "last packet": 1557513286, "flags": [ "RTP", "filled", "confirmed", "kernelized", "no kernel support", "DTLS fingerprint verified" ], "SSRC": 2006816651, "stats": { " packets": 595, "bytes": 40090, "errors": 0 } }, { "local port": 20065, "endpoint": { "family": "IPv4", "address": "174.204.14.29", "port": 10496 }, "advertised endpoint": { "family": "IPv4", "address": "100.81.62.76", "port": 5080 }, "crypto suite": "AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80", "last packet": 1557513284, "flags": [ "RTCP ", "filled", "confirmed", "kernelized", "no kernel support" ], "SSRC": 2006816651, "stats": { "packets": 15, "bytes": 1306, "errors": 0 } } ], "flags": [ "initi alized", "send", "recv", "DTLS-SRTP", "DTLS role passive", "ICE controlling" ] } ] }, "2684eff8-3602-41ed-aca2-9f7938362462": { "tag": "2684eff8-3602-41ed-aca2- 9f7938362462", "created": 1557513231, "in dialogue with": "c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00", "medias": [ { "index": 1, "type": "audio", "protocol": "UDP/TL S/RTP/SAVP", "streams": [ { "local port": 20052, "endpoint": { "family": "IPv4", "address": "97.47.70.223", "port": 4667 }, "advertised endpoint": { "family": " IPv4", "address": "10.255.81.66", "port": 5097 }, "crypto suite": "AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80", "last packet": 1557513284, "flags": [ "RTP", "filled", "confirmed", "kernelized", "no kernel support", "DTLS fingerprint verified" ], "SSRC": 2009301833, "stats": { "packets": 55, "bytes": 3410, "errors": 0 } }, { "local port": 20053, "endpoint": { "family": "IPv4", "address": "97.47.70.223", "port": 4640 }, "advertised endpoint": { "family": "IPv4", "address": "10.255.81.66", "port": 5098 }, "last packet": 1557513283, "flags": [ "RTCP", "filled", "confirmed", "kernelized", "no kernel support" ], "SSRC": 2009301833, "stats": { "packets": 10, "bytes": 936, "errors": 0 } } ], "flags": [ "initialized", "send", "recv", "DTLS-SRTP", "DTLS role passive" ] } ] } }, "totals": { "RTP": { "packets": 650, "bytes": 43500, "errors": 0 }, "RTCP": { "packets": 25, "bytes": 2242, "errors": 0 } }, "result": "ok" } [1557513287.087244] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513287.087244] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513287.087282] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SR from 77c38349: RTP TS 1725021880 PC 1560319321 OC 3364521432 NTP TS 1121433750/3398500622=1121433750.791275 [1557513287.087290] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about 9ba3be3b: FL 18 TL 4080170 HSR 3714308681 J 2085763389 LSR 1453166610 DLSR 3867570679 [1557513287.087303] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add 9ba3be3b) - deleting SSRC 77b8933 [1557513287.087311] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513287.087324] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513287.087328] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: RR from 77c38349 about 477b6daa: FL 136 TL 7495912 HSR 3723043622 J 76729872 LSR 791112841 DLSR 2264873880 [1557513287.087332] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add 477b6daa) - deleting SSRC b7800717 [1557513287.087338] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20053]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513287.165301] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 200 [1557513287.165344] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SR from 779d978b: RTP TS 4203649664 PC 1900914033 OC 1842228915 NTP TS 2577169143/1958584749=2577169143.456018 [1557513287.165355] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: RR from 779d978b about 643dc91f: FL 113 TL 8548413 HSR 913668020 J 2977588542 LSR 2353716277 DLSR 1468396047 [1557513287.165370] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add 643dc91f) - deleting SSRC e03bd142 [1557513287.165382] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513287.165396] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: Calling handler for RTCP packet type 201 [1557513287.165403] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: RR from 779d978b about 7d2457ab: FL 45 TL 2024736 HSR 174032952 J 3137856066 LSR 2564654212 DLSR 844577710 [1557513287.165410] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: SSRC hash table exceeded size limit (trying to add 7d2457ab) - deleting SSRC 476ec510 [1557513287.165418] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340 port 20065]: No payload type known for RTCP RR, discarding [1557513316.000248] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Call branch 'c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00' (via-branch '') deleted, no more branches remaining [1557513316.000290] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Final packet stats: [1557513316.000297] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: --- Tag '2684eff8-3602-41ed-aca2-9f7938362462', created 1:25 ago for branch '', in dialogue with 'c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00' [1557513316.000308] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: ------ Media #1 (audio over UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP) using iLBC/8000 [1557513316.000318] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: --------- Port 209.182.216.71:20052 <> 97.47.70.223:4667 , SSRC 77c38349, 55 p, 3410 b, 0 e, 32 ts [1557513316.000325] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: --------- Port 209.182.216.71:20053 <> 97.47.70.223:4640 (RTCP), SSRC 77c38349, 12 p, 1120 b, 0 e, 29 ts [1557513316.000330] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: --- Tag 'c71ac9de-9bf5-4f39-9fda-6bd3aaf97d00', created 1:25 ago for branch '', in dialogue with '2684eff8-3602-41ed-aca2-9f7938362462' [1557513316.000339] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: ------ Media #1 (audio over UDP/TLS/RTP/SAVP) using iLBC/8000 [1557513316.000347] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: --------- Port 209.182.216.71:20064 <> 174.204.14.29:10523, SSRC 779d978b, 595 p, 40090 b, 0 e, 30 ts [1557513316.000355] INFO: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: --------- Port 209.182.216.71:20065 <> 174.204.14.29:10496 (RTCP), SSRC 779d978b, 17 p, 1490 b, 0 e, 29 ts [1557513316.000521] DEBUG: [05c7dcfe-06f3-4630-9799-0557b76cc340]: Sending DTLS packet

2 1

DMQ re-ordering concern
by Julien Chavanton 11 May '19

11 May '19

Yesterday at Kamailio World there was an interesting question, raising a concern about replication of user location and DMQ in general, we should track it in the mailing list and use it as a feature request and I can share my initial thoughts on the topic. The concern was about DMQ reordering transactions. With SIP registration this seems like a minor concern, high responsiveness at the cost of potential small inconsistency seems like a good option. Considering that, the state will automatically correct itself and that this can be controlled using the expiration timer. This will become even more insignificant when the replicas can only be used as primary server failover. (it becomes a very small concern only when the primary server fails) With other type of data re-ordering may result in more problematic use cases. My impression is that DMQ should try to be good only with volatile data, data that will expire anyway, like caching with expiration, registration, Dialogs, etc. I think it may be worth looking at adding support for ordering/queuing in DMQ. Performance and simplicity could be maintained by doing mainly transactions in parallel with a configurable re-ordering best effort to minimize the impact of the problem. For example : 1- trying to re-order for a configurable amount of time. (32 seconds to match the RFC for SIP re-transmissions) 2- adding tractability for failed transactions. 3- the possibility to trigger a re-sync. Another option is to look at preserving strict ordering but I can imagine this could add more problems in some cases ...

2 4

Question regarding NAPTR and RURI
by Schneuwly Mathias RUAG 10 May '19

10 May '19

Hi I've a question about NAPTR lockup and rewriting the RURI. Following a little example: - Alice at location A tries to call Bob at location B - location A uses the RURI naptr.locationB.com to reach location B - this NAPTR resolves to hostb.locationB.com and host B is listening on port 5070 hostb has the following alias defined: - udp:hostb.locationB.com:5070 The problem now is, that the incoming RURI is "sip:bob@naptr.locationB.com" and the check to myself is not True. Is there a possibility to rewrite the RURI to the result of the NAPTR query? If I would add a second alias like "udp:naptr.locationB.com:5070" a check to myself would still fail as the RURI does not contain a port. So I would have to add an alias like "udp:naptr.locationB.com" without port, then it would work.? Is this the way to go? Because the documentation says it is important to include the port, otherwise the loose_route() will not work as expected... Thanks for your replies! Mathias

1 0

Help identifying mem leaks
by Duarte Rocha 10 May '19

10 May '19

Greetings, Recently one of my Kamailio's started started answering with a lot of 500 replies to requests because of insufficient private memory. The service Kamailio had been running for 6 months now. In order to solve this i increased the private memory settings and restarted the Kamailio. Before that, when searching a bit about the issue i found an old thread where Daniel suggested using " kamcmd corex.pkg_summary idx 1" to check for pkg leaks in the sip worker process. I ran this before doing the restart in order to identify leaks and found the summary in the logs. However, i am having a hard time interpreting this summary and being able to know if i have or not a mem leak. What should i be looking for? This is the beggining of the summary : qm_status: (0x7ff3c8cef010): qm_status: heap size= 8388608 qm_status: used= 928576, used+overhead=1464080, free=6924528 qm_status: max used (+overhead)= 1488472 qm_status: dumping all alloc'ed. fragments: qm_status: 0. N address=0x7ff3c8d286d8 frag=0x7ff3c8d286a0 size=1024 used=1 qm_status: alloc'd from core: core/str_hash.h: str_hash_alloc(59) qm_status: start check=f0f0f0f0, end check= c0c0c0c0, abcdefed qm_status: 1. N address=0x7ff3c8d28b40 frag=0x7ff3c8d28b08 size=256 used=1 qm_status: alloc'd from core: core/str_hash.h: str_hash_alloc(59) qm_status: start check=f0f0f0f0, end check= c0c0c0c0, abcdefed qm_status: 2. N address=0x7ff3c8d28ca8 frag=0x7ff3c8d28c70 size=184 used=1 qm_status: alloc'd from core: core/counters.c: cnt_hash_add(332) qm_status: start check=f0f0f0f0, end check= c0c0c0c0, abcdefed Any help? Best Regards, Duarte Rocha

1 0

How to configure Kamailio 5.1 with Asterisk pjsip
by przeqpiciel 10 May '19

10 May '19

Hi, There is any working examples how to configure dispatcher module of Kamailio? I have working registrations but working in half dialing function.Signalling are come to asterisk and rtp start sending to my IP but i cant hear anything. Asterisk are doing registrar job - i dont know if it is good idea, maybe not.

5 11

RTP multiplexing, batching and compression (KamailioWorld followup)
by Stefan Sayer 09 May '19

09 May '19

Hi, as a followup to the 5 min 5 slides talk on Tuesday at the Kamailio world conference, I wanted to send links to that implementation, as I did get some interest about this afterwards. This transparent RTP mux gateway implementation in SEMS is a multiplexing, batching and compression mechanism, which can save quite some bandwidth on low bitrate codecs - can be useful if you need to work with very low bitrate links, e.g. on satellite (I tested with 10 G729 calls instead of 5 on a 128kbit sat link). It's a bit like ROHC (RFC3095) but on application level, only for RTP, and by using configuration for IP addresses instead of negotiation. Or as osmux, but without separate negotiation (but in-band), and for all codecs, and SIP. Or iax2 trunking mode, but with normal SIP/RTP. https://github.com/sems-server/sems/blob/sayer/rtp-mux/doc/rtp_mux/rtp_mux_… https://github.com/sems-server/sems/blob/sayer/rtp-mux/doc/rtp_mux/rtp_mux.… For now it's in the sayer/rtp-mux branch, but it's planned to merge it to master, possibly with simplification of the configuration. On another note, many thanks to the organizers of the Kamailio World conference! It's both really nice to meet, and very useful, and I think as well individually as well as for the community as a whole. Best Regards, Stefan

1 0

CRM / Windows integration
by Mark Boyce 09 May '19

09 May '19

Hi All Does anyone have any pointers for integrating Kamailio with CRMs (Dynamics / Salesforce / Zoho) or native Windows? We’re looking for basic click to dial / screen pop. Thanks Mark -- Mark Boyce Dark Origins Ltd

4 5

RE-invite in case of SIP is Active
by Gaurav Bmotra 09 May '19

09 May '19

HI i m gaurav i have installed kamailio 5.1.x on Ubuntu server 18.4 How can i use Re-invite in kamailio if SIP is active so that call can reconnect in case of network loss plz help -- *Regards:* Gaurav Kumar

2 2

Call reconnect in case of loss network
by Gaurav Bmotra 09 May '19

09 May '19

HI i m gaurav i have installed kamailio 5.1.x on Ubuntu server 18.4 when i call from one to another extension , in case of loss network it disconnect the call or stuck there , how can i make it as re-connection when network loss , and it will try to reconnect for some seconds like 30 sec "Example for callingn skype it reconnectcall in case of lossnetwork " plz help -- *Regards:* Gaurav Kumar

1 0

Sending in-dialog requests from custom module's C code
by Ivan Ribakov 09 May '19

09 May '19

I’m working on a custom Kamailio module where I need to send new-dialog and in-dialog requests on timer (hence I’m being forced to generate new messages from C code). So far I’ve been using modules/tm/tm_load.h defined interface to generate messages and handle callbacks. New dialog messages are sent and processed normally. To do that I’m: 1. Calling set_uac_request() to define request parameters 2. Calling tmb.t_request_outside() to send it outside any existing dialog I was able to send in-dialog requests (or so I thought) in a similar fashion, but I soon realised that responses to those requests were dropped because they couldn’t be matched against any known existing transaction. I’m attaching log messages that I believe support this theory and I’ve also observed UDP retransmissions. tm [t_lookup.c:897]: t_reply_matching(): t_reply_matching: hash 50576 label 0 branch 0 tm [t_lookup.c:990]: t_reply_matching(): no matching transaction exists tm [t_lookup.c:993]: t_reply_matching(): failure to match a transaction tm [t_lookup.c:1088]: t_check_msg(): msg (0x5abcb50) id=1 global id=1 T end=(nil) tm [t_reply.c:2195]: reply_received(): transaction not found - (branch -1) The way I’m currently generating in-dialog requests is very similar to what tmb.t_request_outside() does, the main difference being that I do the dialog setup manually, based on the call-ID, cseq and from/to tags (I’m tracking transaction identifiers separately) and then pass resulting uac_req_t to tmb.t_request_within() - https://gist.github.com/IvanRibakov/3302cb286b1f4b786d109b406f2435a2 <https://gist.github.com/IvanRibakov/3302cb286b1f4b786d109b406f2435a2> Now, the question part - does anyone know what I’m doing wrong/missing? As I mentioned, when looking at the generated message bodies, they look ok to me (left - initial request that started the dialog, right - first in-dialog request), so I’m guessing I’m missing some Kamailio internal steps needed to register new transaction. SIP flow (up to the point when first UDP retransmission happens) I apologise in advance for the bulky question and will be extremely thankful for any guidance. Regards, Ivan

2 2

GDB debugging Kamailio 5.2.2 IMS authorization failed by the SCSCF
by Woscek, Martin W. 08 May '19

08 May '19

Hi, Looking for some advice running the debugger and setting breakpoints in Kamailio modules such as the SCSCF. Example: We were trying to watch the authenticate() function: 714 int authenticate(struct sip_msg* msg, char* _realm, char* str2, int is_proxy_auth) { Our Kamailio 5.2.2 code was compiled and linked from source with the -g option already enabled by default. We also dropped our Workers to 1 from 16 in the scscf.xml file for the SCSCF to limit the thread count and get the following list of threads below: We tried the first cdp threads: 8462, 8463, and 8464 and while we could set a break point at line 714 for the authenticate() function, it didn't actually break there at all. Question: What pid will we use to catch the authenticate() called during an initial registration from a boghe client? Anything special we may be missing, gdb related or Kamailio settings? kamcmd -s /run/kamailio_scscf/kamailio_ctl kamcmd 1.5 Copyright 2006 iptelorg GmbH This is free software with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. For details type `warranty'. kamcmd> ps 8456 main process - attendant 8457 udp receiver child=0 sock=10.0.20.1:6060 8458 slow timer 8459 timer 8460 secondary timer 8461 ctl handler 8462 cdp worker child=0 8463 cdp receiver peer unknown 8464 cdp_receiver_peer=hss522.irisims.org 8465 cdp_acceptor 8466 cdp_timer 8470 notification_worker 8471 notification_worker 8472 notification_worker 8473 notification_worker 8477 JSONRPCS FIFO 8478 JSONRPCS DATAGRAM Any advice appreciated. Thanks, Martin Woscek

2 1

http_client_query module?
by Andrew Chen 08 May '19

08 May '19

Hey guys, Need help here. What module besides tls.so I need to load in order to get http_client_query to work? The module doc says tls.so: #!ifdef WITH_TLS loadmodule "tls.so" #!endif but I keep getting this when doing config check: root@ashmaintpsg51:/etc/kamailio# kamailio -c kamailio.cfg 0(12971) ERROR: <core> [core/modparam.c:152]: set_mod_param_regex(): No module matching <http_client> found 0(12971) CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3449]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg, line 322, column 71: Can't set module parameter 0(12971) ERROR: <core> [core/modparam.c:152]: set_mod_param_regex(): No module matching <http_client> found 0(12971) CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3449]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg, line 323, column 45: Can't set module parameter 0(12971) ERROR: <core> [core/modparam.c:152]: set_mod_param_regex(): No module matching <http_client> found 0(12971) CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3449]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg, line 324, column 42: Can't set module parameter 0(12971) ERROR: <core> [core/modparam.c:152]: set_mod_param_regex(): No module matching <http_client> found 0(12971) CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3449]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg, line 325, column 48: Can't set module parameter 0(12971) ERROR: <core> [core/modparam.c:152]: set_mod_param_regex(): No module matching <http_client> found 0(12971) CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3449]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg, line 326, column 44: Can't set module parameter 0(12971) ERROR: <core> [core/modparam.c:152]: set_mod_param_regex(): No module matching <http_client> found 0(12971) CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3449]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg, line 327, column 71: Can't set module parameter 0(12971) ERROR: <core> [core/modparam.c:152]: set_mod_param_regex(): No module matching <http_client> found 0(12971) CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3449]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg, line 328, column 67: Can't set module parameter 0(12971) ERROR: <core> [core/modparam.c:152]: set_mod_param_regex(): No module matching <http_client> found 0(12971) CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3449]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg, line 329, column 41: Can't set module parameter 0(12971) ERROR: <core> [core/cfg.y:3309]: yyparse(): cfg. parser: failed to find command http_client_query (params 2) 0(12971) CRITICAL: <core> [core/cfg.y:3449]: yyerror_at(): parse error in config file /etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg, line 859, column 105: unknown command, missing loadmodule? and I have the package installed on my ubuntu 18.04: ii kamailio-*tls*-modules:amd64 5.1.2-1ubuntu2 amd64 TLS support for the Kamailio SIP server (authentication, transport) thoughts? -- Andy Chen Sr. Telephony Lead Engineer achen@ <achen(a)thinkingphones.com>fuze.com -- *Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and permanently delete the e-mail and any attachments immediately. You should not retain, copy or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of the contents to any other person. Thank you.*

2 3

Udp errors on High Availability Setup
by Duarte Rocha 08 May '19

08 May '19

Greetings, I have two Machines with Kamailio in a High Availability (HA) configuration. Both machines are active and processing calls and both have one HA IP that can jump to the other machine in case of failure. I also have probing for NAPs configured with each IP as the socket. So, in each machine i have this configuration : listen=udp:HA_Address1 listen=udp:HA_Address2 NAP 1 being probed from socket HA_Address1 NAP 1 being probed from socket HA_Address2 I also have /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_nonlocal_bind with value 1. Everything works correctly with this configuration. However when the probing is sent for the NAP' my logs get filled with the same error messages. udp_send(): sendto(sock, buf: 0x7f2d4c91fa18, len: 340, 0, dst: (xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:xxx), tolen: 16) - err: Invalid argument (22) CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:602]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net ERROR: tm [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed The error happens because it is trying to probe a NAP using a socket that isn't active at the moment in the machine. Is there a way for this error not to be logged or be disabled without reducing Log Level to suppress CRITICAL errors? I think this is a standard High Availability configuration. Is there some setting that can disable this kind of errors? Best Regards, Duarte Rocha

3 5

HELP ME
by khadime gaye 07 May '19

07 May '19

Good morning, How I can resolve this problem ? << ERROR: Could not load the script in /usr/local/lib64/kamailio//kamctl/kamdbctl.mysql for database engine MYSQL ERROR: database engine not loaded - tried 'MYSQL' >>

2 1

implementing custom authentication method
by Walter.Martín Villalba 03 May '19

03 May '19

Dear list, I'm implementing a custom method for user authentication and would like to kindly ask for some guidance regarding the server side changes that may be needed in order to keep things running smoothly. The idea is to replace the standard user/pass-based digest authentication with a custom one based on Open ID Connect (OIDC) access tokens. I already have some pieces working (receiving access token in REGISTER message, validating the token by calling custom python routine, etc.), but I'm missing the bits needed to keep track of users who have successfully authenticated. While looking at sipcomm.cfg I found calls to *www_authenticate* (defined in modules/auth_db/authorize.c), which in turn calls to *mark_authorized_cred*, *check_auth_hr* (or *auth_check_hdr_md5*), and *generate_avps*,. Some of these functions are indeed changing some values in the DB and/or in memory, and this is where I would like some guidance. Is there any documentation I could look at which hopefully explains what DB values and/or data structures in memory need to be updated in order to keep track of successfully authenticated users? I believe with this last piece I'd be able to wrap up my custom authentication implementation. Thanks in advance! Regards, Walter Martín.

1 0

Kamailio bypassing RTP media
by Ali Taher 03 May '19

03 May '19

Hi everyone, I'm new to kamailio. I plan to setup a sip server cluster, Does someone can give me some suggestions if I can use kamailio as front server, which handle sip message and bypass rtp media message to backendserver, this mean the kamailio handle only sip message, the rtp packets are sent directed to backend server. The sip sequences is 1.softswitch send invite to kamailio 2.kamailio send invite to backend server. 3.backend server return 200 ok to kamailio 4.kamailio return 200 ok to softswitch, the ip and port in sip is from the backend server's msg, this make the softswitch send rtp direct to backend server. 5.rtp packets are transfered between softswitch and backend server. .... 6.backend server send bye to kamailio 7.kamailio send bye to softswitch. Any help is appreciated. Regards, Ali Taher

4 5

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