23 Jun
2005
23 Jun
'05
1:44 p.m.
OK, the REGISTER message contains a private IP in the contact. That
would force SER to rewrite the IP address with the public IP of the NAT
and the user agent is probably unable to match the contact and find out
what the expires value set by the server is. That explains why it works
with Expires: 60 header field parameter but does not work with
;expires=60 contact parameter.
There are two options:
1) Hack -- insert Expires: 50 header field into the reply using
append_to_reply function from textopts module. Note that the value you
insert this way must be lower than the value of expires parameter in the
contact.
2) Use fix_nated_register instead of fix_nated_contact for REGISTER
messages. This function does not rewrite the IP in contact, instead
it would append the public IP and port used by the NAT as a parameter
of Contact header field. The two values will be stored separately in
the user location database. When forwarding a message to the contact,
the Request-URI will contain the private IP of the user agent, but
the message will be sent to the public IP of the NAT (destination set
will be used). This way the Contact in 200 OK reply will be not
modified and the user agent should be able to set the expires value
properly.
Jan.
On 23-06-2005 17:59, Chia Huey Lim wrote:
Sure...
SER:
REGISTER sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.0.4:5060;branch=z9hG4bKd9e688a70
Max-Forwards: 70
Content-Length: 0
To: 5008 <sip:18182002@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>
From: 5008 <sip:18182002@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>;tag=1f55b6cd5586c2d
Call-ID: 928d75b5b6c7d128a0ccaf24e5b52c74(a)192.168.0.4
CSeq: 1028949335 REGISTER
Contact: 5008 <sip:18182002@192.168.0.4:5060;user=phone>;expires=60
Allow: NOTIFY
Allow: REFER
Allow: OPTIONS
Allow: INVITE
Allow: ACK
Allow: CANCEL
Allow: BYE
User-Agent: InterEdge-ieta200
ASTERISK:
REGISTER sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.0.4;branch=z9hG4bKf91124aeb
Max-Forwards: 70
Content-Length: 0
To: 603200661 <sip:603200661@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>
From: 603200661 <sip:603200661@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>;tag=7f4a78971dd573b
Call-ID: 59a4ee90d5fbe74f8de459fb2506acf0(a)192.168.0.4
CSeq: 937060361 REGISTER
Contact: 603200661 <sip:603200661@192.168.0.4;user=phone>;expires=1200
Allow: NOTIFY
Allow: REFER
Allow: OPTIONS
Allow: INVITE
Allow: ACK
Allow: CANCEL
Allow: BYE
Authorization:Digest
response="869ebcdfd4f83cfd805c0b03e768b9a5",username="603200661",realm="xxx"
,nonce="297966ac",uri="sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx"
User-Agent: InterEdge-ieta200
Regards,
Chia
-----Original Message-----
From: 'Jan Janak' [mailto:jan@iptel.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 5:44 PM
To: Chia Huey Lim
Cc: 'Juan Carlos Castro y Castro'; serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] SER losing SIP registrations
Could send me also the REGISTER messages ?
Jan.
On 23-06-2005 17:36, Chia Huey Lim wrote:
I am facing the same problem too, one of the UA
that I am testing on does
not re-register itself. It has no problem re-registering itself to
asterisk.
I compared the ethereal trace for the registration on SER and Asterisk.
And
I found that Asterisk append "Expires:
xxx" above the "Contact: " while
SER
does not. Anything that I can do to append
"Expires: xxx" in the 200 ok
packet that SER is sending out?
Below is the comparison:
SER:
ĸe`SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
192.168.0.4:5060;branch=z9hG4bKef17e9623;rport=32914;received=xxx.xxx.xxx.xx
x
To: 5008
<sip:18182002@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>;tag=856642a4d7f9f16db9502202a011388b.db9a
From: 5008 <sip:18182002@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>;tag=1f55b6cd5586c2d
Call-ID: 928d75b5b6c7d128a0ccaf24e5b52c74(a)192.168.0.4
CSeq: 1028949336 REGISTER
Contact:<sip:18182002@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:32914;user=phone>;expires=60;received=
"sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:32914"
Server: Sip EXpress router (0.9.0 (i386/linux))
Content-Length: 0
ASTERISK:
ÄÄ
x9SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
192.168.0.4;branch=z9hG4bKf91124aeb;received=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;rport=32914
From: 603200661 <sip:603200661@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>;tag=7f4a78971dd573b
To: 603200661 <sip:603200661@xxx.xxx.xxxx.xxx>;tag=as4f0c60fe
Call-ID: 59a4ee90d5fbe74f8de459fb2506acf0(a)xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
CSeq: 937060361 REGISTER
User-Agent: xxx
Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER
Expires: 1200
Contact: <sip:603200661@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;user=phone>;expires=1200
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 04:36:20 GMT
Content-Length: 0
Thanks.
Regards,
Chia
-----Original Message-----
From: serusers-bounces(a)iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On
Behalf Of Jan Janak
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 4:39 PM
To: Juan Carlos Castro y Castro
Cc: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Subject: Re: [Serusers] SER losing SIP registrations
On 22-06-2005 17:57, Juan Carlos Castro y Castro wrote:
Our company has a call center implementation on a
client with up to 100
support personnel using X-Lite version 1050 softphones running under
Windows 98. Until a few days ago, the softphones were logged in directly
on our PBXs. Now, they log onto a separate SER 0.8.14 box and the PBXs
forward calls to SER. That was needed to unify queue management.
It works. But some softphones are being randomly kicked out of SER, it
seems SER isn't receiving the refresh REGISTER messages from the
softphones. The re-register timeout is set to 500 seconds on the
softphones. There's a lot of "removing spare zombie" and "Binding
'<user>','<url>' has expired" messages in
/var/log/messages.
The message means that SER did not receive REGISTER re-fresh and is
thus removing the contact from the user location database.
Pick one user agent that has this problem and install ngrep monitor on
the server to monitor all REGISTER messages from that user agent. This
way you could find out if the problem is in the user agent or network
(in this case you will not see REGISTER refresh messages on the
server) or in SER (in that case you will see them but SER probably
fails to process them).
Also make sure that SER is not configured to shorten the registration
period. When registrar receives a REGISTER message, it is free to use
shorter expires value for the Contac than what was suggested by the
user agent in the request. In this case the real expires value of the
contact will be in 200 OK and user agents are suppose to pick it up
from there and update the refresh interval accordingly. This may not
work in the case when Contact IP address is rewritten by the server
for the purpose of NAT traversal. In this case the user agent will be
unable to find its contact (because it has been rewritten) and will
not update the refresh interval (resulting in expired registrations).
For now, we're instructing the client to
increase the timeout to 10
hours on the softphones in which the problem happens most often. I don't
know if that's really the right thing to do, I think we should somehow
make sure the re-registers are done in a timely fashion and retried, but
I could not find ant SER configuration option related to that. What
should I do?
You can configure the maximum allowed expires value in SER, if a user
agent tries to REGISTER a contact with longer expires value than it
will be automatically updated by registrar to the value of max_expires
parameter.
There is also min_expires parameter in registrar module but that one
should not be used because the current implementation violates
RFC3261.
If you are using any of the two parameter than it might be a good idea
to retry without them (to see if the problem persists).
Jan.