22 Jul
2015
22 Jul
'15
5:25 p.m.
sorry, I forgot to mention, this is with Kamailio v4.3.1:
# kamailio -V
version: kamailio 4.3.1 (x86_64/linux) f38e67
flags: STATS: Off, USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS,
DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MEM, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC,
F_MALLOC, DBG_F_MALLOC, USE_FUTEX, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT,
USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST,
HAVE_RESOLV_RES
ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS=1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_LISTEN 16,
MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB
poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
id: f38e67
compiled on 18:15:23 Jul 20 2015 with gcc 4.4.7
Thanks
On 22/07/2015 15:22, Asgaroth wrote:
Hi All,
I have an issue with the dmq_is_from_node() function, whereby it does
not detect a node is on the bus if it has been removed from its
"table" due to previously failed, i presume, ping requests.
I have the following snippet in my main routing block:
if(is_method("KDMQ")) {
if (dmq_is_from_node()) {
dmq_handle_message();
exit;
} else {
xlog("L_INFO", "KDMQ message recieved from node not on our
bus!! ($si:$sp) Dropping.");
exit;
}
}
I have the following dmq module parameters enabled for dmq:
modparam("dmq", "server_address", DMQ_ADDRESS)
modparam("dmq", "notification_address",
"sip:lb.domain.com:5060")
modparam("dmq", "multi_notify", 1)
modparam("dmq", "num_workers", 4)
DMQ_ADDRESS is set to each of the addresses in the lb.domain.com for
each local kamailio instance
lb.domain.com resolves to the following addresses:
10.6.0.109
10.6.0.110
10.6.0.111
If I start up the 1st instance of kamailio and do not start the other
2 within the default ping timout then I get the expected log message
of dmq removing the nodes from its table, for example:
kamailio[26657]: ERROR: dmq [notification_peer.c:588]:
notification_resp_callback_f(): deleting server sip:10.6.0.111:5060
because of failed request
kamailio[26657]: ERROR: dmq [notification_peer.c:588]:
notification_resp_callback_f(): deleting server sip:10.6.0.110:5060
because of failed request
However, if I then start one, or both, of the other nodes, then the
KDMQ requests are dropped due to my snippet above, I presume, because
dmq_is_from_node() checks its "active" table. See messages below as an
example of the above snippet in action:
kamailio[26656]: INFO: <script>: KDMQ message recieved from node not
on our bus!! (10.6.0.110:5060) Dropping.
kamailio[26656]: INFO: <script>: KDMQ message recieved from node not
on our bus!! (10.6.0.111:5060) Dropping.
Is this expected behaviour from the dmq_is_from_node() function? I
would have expected it to always check the addresses resolved in the
notification address, or am I using this function in a manner not
intended.
Any suggestions/tips would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks