28 Jun
2007
28 Jun
'07
12:53 p.m.
I'm not sure I understand, Greger. I see the via_cnt, but that's the
first (and only) BYE message that comes through. I would have thought
had I been looping around, I might see a few more on the interface.
Also, why does this ONLY happen with certain peers, but not with most
others and not with anything local? And why only on BYE and ACK messages
but not INVITE?
So... confused....
Just when I think I have a handle on SER, it turns around and does
something like this.
Greger V. Teigre wrote:
Yes, you probably have an internal loop. You should
see it on the
interface. The first iteration, the Route header will be found, it
points to local SER, it is removed and it is thus not loose routed,
the uri is probably not rewritten, so it is t_relayed to itself...
Look at the via_cnt in the warning...
g-)
SIP wrote:
> In response to a BYE and an ACK from some (not all) servers that send
> to our proxy, our server's spitting back a 483 'Too many hops' reply.
>
> It doesn't happen with all peers, and it certainly doesn't happen
> locally... but it does happen with some, and I'm not entirely sure
> as to why.
>
> The 483 block at the beginning is normal:
>
>
> if (msg:len > max_len ) {
> sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big");
> break;
> };
>
>
>
> Exchange looks like this:
>
> U 198.65.166.131:5060 -> 63.64.65.66:5060
> BYE sip:1101XXXXXXX@63.64.65.66:5060 SIP/2.0.
> Record-Route: <sip:198.65.166.131;ftag=gpp0q468oh;lr>.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 198.65.166.131;branch=z9hG4bK9b05.b75fbe14.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
> 192.168.1.51:2054;received=63.XX.XX.XX;branch=z9hG4bK-wdtud2nffq88;rport=2054.
>
> Route: <sip:63.64.65.66;ftag=gpp0q468oh;lr=on>.
> From: "User One"
> <sip:1747XXXXXXX@their.proxy.server:5060>;tag=gpp0q468oh.
> To: <sip:1101XXXXXXX@their.proxy.server;user=phone>;tag=as7fbbcb66.
> Call-ID: 3c267038e7ef-586eg1emcfsi@snom190.
> CSeq: 2 BYE.
> Max-Forwards: 16.
> Contact: <sip:1747XXXXXXX@192.168.1.51:2054;line=oxd9zlst;nat=yes>.
> User-Agent: snom190/3.60x.
> Content-Length: 0.
> RemoteIP: 63.XX.XX.XX.
> P-hint: rr-enforced.
> P-NATed-URI: YES (1).
> P-RTP-Proxy: YES (1).
>
>
> U 63.64.65.66:5060 -> 198.65.166.131:5060
> SIP/2.0 483 Too Many Hops.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 198.65.166.131;branch=z9hG4bK9b05.b75fbe14.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
> 192.168.1.51:2054;received=63.XX.XX.XX;branch=z9hG4bK-wdtud2nffq88;rport=2054.
>
> From: "User One"
> <sip:1747XXXXXXX@their.proxy.server:5060>;tag=gpp0q468oh.
> To: <sip:1101XXXXXXX@their.proxy.server;user=phone>;tag=as7fbbcb66.
> Call-ID: 3c267038e7ef-586eg1emcfsi@snom190.
> CSeq: 2 BYE.
> Server: Sip EXpress router (0.9.6 (i386/linux)).
> Content-Length: 0.
> Warning: 392 63.64.65.66:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=3488
> req_src_ip=63.64.65.66 req_src_port=5060
> in_uri=sip:1101XXXXXXX@63.64.65.66:5060
> out_uri=sip:1101XXXXXXX@63.64.65.66:5060 via_cnt==18".
>
>
>
> What would be causing this? Is it because the IP address is being
> used in the URI to us as opposed to the domain (I tried adding the IP
> to the domain table and to an alias line alternately, but it didn't
> fix things) ?
>
> It's irksome in that it only happens with certain peers and not
> others, so there's something in the way we're handling messages from
> them that's not right or different, but since we handle all incoming
> the same way, I'm at a loss as to why it works with some but not with
> others.
>
> N.
> _______________________________________________
> Serusers mailing list
> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>
>
>