5 Aug
2004
5 Aug
'04
6:37 a.m.
hello friends
in nat its not working
i have downloaded the stable cvs version of ser
and rtp proxy of
[root@server rtpproxy]# ./rtpproxy -v
20040107
and my ser.cfg file looks like this
*******************************************************
debug=8 # debug level
fork=yes
log_stderror=yes # (cmd line: -E)
check_via=no # (cmd. line: -v)
dns=no # (cmd. line: -r)
rev_dns=no # (cmd. line: -R)
port=5060
children=4
fifo="/tmp/ser_fifo"
# ------------------ module loading
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so"
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/tm.so"
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/rr.so"
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/maxfwd.so"
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/usrloc.so"
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/registrar.so"
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/textops.so"
# !! Nathelper
loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/nathelper.so"
# ----------------- setting module-specific parameters
# -- usrloc params --
modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 0)
# -- rr params --
# add value to ;lr param to make some broken UAs happy
modparam("rr", "enable_full_lr", 1)
# !! Nathelper
modparam("registrar", "nat_flag", 6)
modparam("nathelper", "natping_interval", 30)
modparam("nathelper", "ping_nated_only", 1)
# ------------------------- request routing logic
# main routing logic
route{
# initial sanity checks -- messages with
# max_forwards==0, or excessively long
requests
if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) {
sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops");
break;
};
if (msg:len >= max_len ) {
sl_send_reply("513", "Message too
big");
break;
};
# !! Nathelper
# Special handling for NATed clients; first,
NAT test is
# executed: it looks for via!=received and
RFC1918 addresses
# in Contact (may fail if line-folding is
used); also,
# the received test should, if completed,
should check all
# vias for rpesence of received
if (nat_uac_test("3")) {
# Allow RR-ed requests, as these may
indicate that
# a NAT-enabled proxy takes care of
it; unless it is
# a REGISTER
if (method == "REGISTER" || !
search("^Record-Route:")) {
log("LOG: Someone trying to
register from private IP, rewriting\n");
# This will work only for user
agents that support symmetric
# communication. We tested quite
many of them and majority is
# smart enough to be symmetric. In
some phones it takes a configuration
# option. With Cisco 7960, it is
called NAT_Enable=Yes, with kphone it is
# called "symmetric media" and
"symmetric signalling".
fix_nated_contact(); # Rewrite
contact with source IP of signalling
if (method == "INVITE") {
fix_nated_sdp("1"); # Add
direction=active to SDP
};
force_rport(); # Add rport
parameter to topmost Via
setflag(6); # Mark as NATed
};
};
# we record-route all messages -- to make sure
that
# subsequent messages will go through our
proxy; that's
# particularly good if upstream and downstream
entities
# use different transport protocol
if (!method=="REGISTER") record_route();
# subsequent messages withing a dialog should
take the
# path determined by record-routing
if (loose_route()) {
# mark routing logic in request
append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n");
route(1);
break;
};
if (!uri==myself) {
# mark routing logic in request
append_hf("P-hint: outbound\r\n");
route(1);
break;
};
# if the request is for other domain use
UsrLoc
# (in case, it does not work, use the
following command
# with proper names and addresses in it)
if (uri==myself) {
if (method=="REGISTER") {
save("location");
break;
};
lookup("aliases");
if (!uri==myself) {
append_hf("P-hint: outbound
alias\r\n");
route(1);
break;
};
# native SIP destinations are handled
using our USRLOC DB
if (!lookup("location")) {
sl_send_reply("404", "Not
Found");
break;
};
};
append_hf("P-hint: usrloc applied\r\n");
route(1);
}
route[1]
{
# !! Nathelper
if
(uri=~"[@:](192\.168\.|10\.|172\.(1[6-9]|2[0-9]|3[0-1])\.)"
&& !search("^Route:")){
sl_send_reply("479", "We don't forward to
private IP addresses");
break;
};
# if client or server know to be behind a NAT,
enable relay
if (isflagset(6)) {
force_rtp_proxy();
};
# NAT processing of replies; apply to all
transactions (for example,
# re-INVITEs from public to private UA are
hard to identify as
# NATed at the moment of request processing);
look at replies
t_on_reply("1");
# send it out now; use stateful forwarding as
it works reliably
# even for UDP2TCP
if (!t_relay()) {
sl_reply_error();
};
}
# !! Nathelper
onreply_route[1] {
# NATed transaction ?
if (isflagset(6) && status =~ "(183)|2[0-9][0-9]")
{
fix_nated_contact();
force_rtp_proxy();
# otherwise, is it a transaction behind a NAT and
we did not
# know at time of request processing ? (RFC1918
contacts)
} else if (nat_uac_test("1")) {
fix_nated_contact();
};
}
*******************************************************
and in ethereal report i found this
******************************************************
[root@server root]# tethereal -r test1.eth
tethereal: Symbol `pcap_version' has different size in
shared object, consider re-linking
1 0.000000 202.65.*.* -> 202.65.*.* UDP Source port:
5001 Destination port: 5060[Malformed Packet]
2 4.084851 202.65.*.* -> 202.65.*.* SIP/SDP
Request: INVITE sip:216110@202.65.*.*, with session
description
3 4.090585 202.65.*.* -> 202.65.*.* SIP Status:
100 trying -- your call is important to us
4 4.090761 202.65.*.* -> 202.65.*.* SIP/SDP
Request: INVITE sip:216110@202.65.*.*:5060, with
session description
5 4.095809 202.65.*.* -> 202.65.*.* ICMP
Destination unreachable
26 33.931583 202.65.*.* -> 202.65.*.* SIP Status:
408 Request Timeout
27 33.952005 202.65.*.* -> 202.65.*.* SIP Request:
ACK sip:216110@202.65.*.*
*******************************************************
with regards
rama kanth
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail