On 28/08/14 15:11, Olle E. Johansson wrote:

On 28 Aug 2014, at 14:57, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda@gmail.com> wrote:

On 28/08/14 14:45, Olle E. Johansson wrote:

On 28 Aug 2014, at 14:14, Yuriy Gorlichenko <ovoshlook@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello. I try to provide call scheme:

internal client  -> asterisk -> Kamailio -> provider -> external endpoint call

when I make call I see this:

asterisk     kamailio   provider
invite -->       invite -->   
                                <--     407
                       ACK   -->    
                       invite w/Auth -->
              <--    100  <--    100
              <--    180  <--    180

              <--    183  <--    183

               <--    200  <--      200

   ACK  -->   ACK  -->

My problem with last ACK, that I send to provider. Provider ignores it, and sends me some OK packets. As resultI can notend session ( answer to BYE 481 - transaction does not exists). I think it is wrong ACK but can not undrtand where I do mistake.

Well, by letting the proxy handle authentication the INVITE tranction i closed without Asterisk knowing about it. So the ACK sent from the proxy and from Asterisk is for the same transaction, which messes things up. Asterisk does not know anything about the second invite. Letting the proxy handle authentiction breaks the SIP protocol in bad ways and is generally not a good solution.

You may want to send another response to asterisk when you get the 407 so Asterisk retries and use the retry as a trigger for the second INVITE and add auth to that.

While breaking the cseq incrementation for authentication (mentioned in the readme of uac), the Asterisk seems to do ok here, because the ACK is coming from asterisk, but it is not accepted by the provider.

You are missing the fact that the ACK sent by Asterisk is already sent by the proxy. The INVITE w/AUth have a different cseq than the ACK.

Kamailio is doing serial forking in this case, so the first ack is for the first branch that gets 407. This should be as usual for serial/parallel forking.

Then, Kamailio is not increasing the cseq here -- that's the limitation with uac auth module, because the authenticator should normally reject it. But if it is authentication against another kamailio, should just work.

The provider (having a plivo platform, based on the responses) is running kamailio 4.1.2 in front (looking at 100 trying).

Authentication from kamailio to another kamailio using uac module should work fine, as kamailio doesn't act as end user UAC and doesn't care much of cseq.

Won't the second ACK on the same transaction just be ignored, while it waits for an ACK on the new transaction?

It is the same transaction in this case, just two branches from kamailio downstream, which is serial forking case, as mentioned above.

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Next Kamailio Advanced Trainings 2014 - http://www.asipto.com
Sep 22-25, Berlin, Germany ::: Oct 15-17, San Francisco, USA

_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users@lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users