18 Jun
2019
18 Jun
'19
11:33 a.m.
Hi Jan,
What happens if you set the dmq server address to the advertised address?
listen=udp:172.17.0.2:5063 advertise 10.20.8.88:5063
modparam("dmq", "server_address", "*sip:10.20.8.88:5063
<http://10.20.8.88:5063>*")
Cheers,
Charles
On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 at 07:53, <jenus(a)cyberchaos.nl> wrote:
Julien,
I have the following config:
Host ip: 10.20.8.88 Internal container ip: 172.17.0.2
listen=udp:172.17.0.2:5063 advertise 10.20.8.88:5063
# ----- dmq params -----
modparam("dmq", "server_address", "sip:172.17.0.2:5063")
modparam("dmq", "num_workers", 4)
modparam("dmq", "ping_interval", 90)
modparam("dmq", "notification_address",
"sip:sip12.voip.domain.test:5063") (on the other node this is
sip11.domain.test)
modparam("dmq", "multi_notify", 1)
# ----- dmq_usrloc params -----
modparam("dmq_usrloc", "enable", 1)
modparam("dmq_usrloc", "sync", 1)
modparam("dmq_usrloc", "batch_msg_contacts", 50) # 50 contacts /
message
modparam("dmq_usrloc", "batch_size", 10000) # 10000 contacts /
batch
modparam("dmq_usrloc", "batch_usleep", 500000) # one batch every
500ms
Here is the output of the kamcmd dmq.list_nodes
root@9d81434d491f:/# kamcmd dmq.list_nodes
{
host: 10.20.8.89
port: 5063
resolved_ip: 10.20.8.89
status: active
last_notification: 0
local: 0
}
{
host: 10.20.8.88
port: 5063
resolved_ip: 10.20.8.88
status: active
last_notification: 0
local: 0
}
{
host: 172.17.0.2
port: 5063
resolved_ip: 172.17.0.2
status: active
last_notification: 0
local: 1
}
I will collect some traces as well of the sync request as requested by
Charles.
Thanks,
Jan
Julien Chavanton schreef op 2019-06-17 21:00:
--
*Charles Chance*
Managing Director
t. 0330 120 1200 m. 07932 063 891
--
Sipcentric Ltd.
Company registered in England & Wales no.
7365592. Registered
office: Faraday Wharf, Innovation
Birmingham Campus, Holt Street, Birmingham Science Park, Birmingham B7 4BB.
Can you share the settings you are using :
modparam("dmq", "server_address", "?")
modparam("dmq", "notification_address", "?")
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 11:30 AM <jenus(a)cyberchaos.nl> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
Hi all,
Is there any other way to filter DMQ peers? I now have a issue with
dmq_usrloc when running in a docker container. When the node comes
online the peer is sending the KDMQ usrloc packet (with the
registered
contacts) to the internal container ip and not the actual external
ip.
Both ip's show up as DMQ peers, after a few keepalive failures the
dmq
peer with the internal container ip becomes inactive and no updates
are
sent to that peer. But the usrloc sync seems to happen before the
peer
is inactive.
I tried to strip the peers with the internal container ip's, this
works
for the requests, but i'm not able to fix this for the responses.
Thanks,
Jan
jenus(a)cyberchaos.nl schreef op 2019-05-02 08:59:
Links:
------
[1] http://sip:notification_peer@10.10.10.94:5060
[2] http://sip:notification_peer@10.10.10.13:5060
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users Hi all,
I'm trying to run a kamailio DMQ node inside a docker container.
All
works fine but i have one issue with DMQ. Since
the kamailio
process
inside the container is behind a nat i have set
the advertise
address
to the external ip, this works fine for the via
headers but DMQ
keeps
sending the internal interface in the KDMQ
notification_peer
messages.
The external ip is in there as well. Example:
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
10.10.10.13;branch=z9hG4bK2dcb.c6326de2000000000000000000000000.0
To:
<sip:notification_peer@10.10.10.94:5060
[1]>;tag=616b7acb681ed5e9cbc485b3faa09d62.0a3d
From:
<sip:notification_peer@10.10.10.13:5060
[2]>;tag=e8f29c06c4b85a188f6533f08d60feb6-ff29
CSeq: 10 KDMQ
Call-ID: 17042656602ca532-23367(a)x.x.x.x
Content-Type: text/plain
Server: kamailio (5.1.4 (x86_64/linux))
Content-Length: 222
sip:10.10.10.13:5060;status=active
sip:10.10.10.12:5060;status=active
sip:10.10.10.92:5060;status=active
sip:10.10.10.93:5060;status=active
sip:10.10.10.94:5060;status=active <-- entry for container
external
ip
sip:172.17.0.2:5060;status=disabled <-- entry for container
internal
ip
I tried to strip this entry using the replace_body_atonce in the
tm:local-request route. This works fine for the KDMQ request, but
when
i try to remove the same line from 200OK
responses that are send
out
as a response to incomming KDMQ messages this
seems to fail. I use
the
following code:
# Working code (for outgoing KDMQ requests):
event_route [tm:local-request]
{
if(is_method("KDMQ") && $rU == "notification_peer")
replace_body_atonce("sip:172.17.0.*:5060;status=.*", "");
}
# Failing code (for 200OK responses):
reply_route
{
xlog("L_ALERT", "REPLY: Sending out reply, tU is $tU rs is
$rs\n");
if ($rs == "200" && $tU ==
"notification_peer")
{
replace_body_atonce("sip:172.17.0.*:5060;status=.*", "");
}
}
I'm running kamailio 5.1.4. Is there a way to strip a line from
the
body of a local generated 200OK response? Or is
there a way to
avoid
that DMQ inserts the internal container ip in the
first place.
Thanks,
Jan Hazenberg
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users