Thank you Michal, I have migrated to SER-2.0 and have compiled with HONOR_MADDR, but having some problem making it work. I cannot get the digest authentication working. I am using the following code for REGISTER,
if (method=="REGISTER") { if(!www_authorize("","credentials")){ www_challenge("","0"); break; }; };
For some reason, www_challenge is not recognised. And gives parse error. Can anyone please tell me how can I get the digest authentication working??
kumar
On 5/7/07, Michal Matyska michal@iptel.org wrote:
Hi,
commetns inline
On Po, 2007-05-07 at 10:04 +0545, KUMAR wrote:
Hi Michal, Sorry for my late response. Here are the packets while the transport UDP is used. regards kumar
On 5/4/07, Michal Matyska michal@iptel.org wrote:
Hi Kumar,
could you please attach also the capture (at the server is enough) of the UDP both way messages? There call flow is quite strange and not understandable.... (well not surprised that's M$ RTC :)
Some comments for now:
- it seems the CLIENT IS BROKEN and does not understand lr=on flag for
loose routing - see how is the ACK generated !!! You can try change rr module parameter to put just lr into the record-route (this might explain your rr and rr_preset difference)
Taking back, the client code is not broken, it is obsoleted only ;-) It uses strict router procedures (RFC2543), to create the Route header and Request-URI in subsequent within-dialog requests, but SER's loose_route function call should be able to escape form that (and it is, the rewritten request uri shows that). If you want to check, you should see "after_strict" message in your debug output.
- M$ is used to misuse maddr, there is compile time flag HONOR_MADDR
which you should have set to route such requests taking maddr into account
This seems to be the main issue, the client does not put maddr into the UDP requests. Check the Route header from the client in the TCP and UDP captures to see the difference.
Recompile SER with the option HONOR_MADDR set and it should work. If not, please provide SER output with debug=4 statement in you ser.cfg, while running the TCP usecase.
Michal
On Pá, 2007-05-04 at 09:52 +0545, KUMAR wrote:
Here are the packet captures. I was not quite sure whether I have to include packet captures from server or the UAs so i've included all of them. ua_A is sending INVITE to ua_B. thank you
regards kumar
On 5/3/07, Klaus Darilion klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at wrote:
Jiri Kuthan wrote:
actually I was suggesting SIP message dump (PCAP file) as opposed to log files. -jiri
or ngrep dump:
ngrep -t -W byline -d any port 5060
regards klaus
At 13:10 03/05/2007, KUMAR wrote: > Here is the message dump that i get when using TCP as transport. >> >> On 5/3/07, Jiri Kuthan jiri@iptel.org wrote: >>> I think you would have to send message dumps first so that [serusers] volunteers >>> have material for providing an answer. >>> >>> -jiri >>> >>> At 12:07 03/05/2007, KUMAR wrote: >>>> - >>>> Hi all, >>>> I already posted this message yet havent got any replies. I really >>>> need to find this out. >>>> Please anyone reply to this problem. >>>> >>>> I am using SER-0.9.6 and the problem i'm having is this. When using >>>> the following ser.cfg, it works well when the transport UDP is used. >>>> But when transport TCP is used, then it only results in one way IM, >>>> only from the UA from which the INVITE is being sent. Moreover, when >>>> record_route is used instead of record_route_preset, then even that >>>> one way IM doesn't work. But it works well with UDP. >>>> >>>> Can anyone please point me as to where the problem might be?? >>>> Thank you in advance. >>>> >>>> kumar >>>> >>>> >>>> Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=ser.cfg >>>> X-Attachment-Id: f_f18sg2bl >>>> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ser.cfg" >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Serusers mailing list >>>> Serusers@lists.iptel.org >>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/ >>> >>> > > Content-Type: audio/x-pn-realaudio-plugin; name="msg_dump.rar" > Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="msg_dump.rar" > X-Attachment-Id: f_f1949112 > > _______________________________________________ > Serusers mailing list > Serusers@lists.iptel.org > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-- Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Hi Kumar, authentication functions were renamed in SER 2.0. Look into ser.cfg example distributed with SER (in its etc directory). It is now done like this:
if (!www_authenticate("some-realm.com", "credentials")) { if ($? == -2) { sl_reply("500", "Internal Server Error"); } else if ($? == -3) { sl_reply("400", "Bad Request"); } else { if ($digest_challenge) { append_to_reply("%$digest_challenge"); } sl_reply("401", "Unauthorized"); } drop; }
I guess that it is needed to load textops module due to using append_to_reply function...
BTW, which function comes from which module you can find here: http://www.iptel.org/ser/doc/search
Vaclav
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 11:54:59AM +0545, KUMAR wrote:
Thank you Michal, I have migrated to SER-2.0 and have compiled with HONOR_MADDR, but having some problem making it work. I cannot get the digest authentication working. I am using the following code for REGISTER,
if (method=="REGISTER") { if(!www_authorize("","credentials")){ www_challenge("","0"); break; }; };
For some reason, www_challenge is not recognised. And gives parse error. Can anyone please tell me how can I get the digest authentication working??
kumar
On 5/7/07, Michal Matyska michal@iptel.org wrote:
Hi,
commetns inline
On Po, 2007-05-07 at 10:04 +0545, KUMAR wrote:
Hi Michal, Sorry for my late response. Here are the packets while the transport UDP is used. regards kumar
On 5/4/07, Michal Matyska michal@iptel.org wrote:
Hi Kumar,
could you please attach also the capture (at the server is enough) of the UDP both way messages? There call flow is quite strange and not understandable.... (well not surprised that's M$ RTC :)
Some comments for now:
- it seems the CLIENT IS BROKEN and does not understand lr=on flag for
loose routing - see how is the ACK generated !!! You can try change rr module parameter to put just lr into the record-route (this might explain your rr and rr_preset difference)
Taking back, the client code is not broken, it is obsoleted only ;-) It uses strict router procedures (RFC2543), to create the Route header and Request-URI in subsequent within-dialog requests, but SER's loose_route function call should be able to escape form that (and it is, the rewritten request uri shows that). If you want to check, you should see "after_strict" message in your debug output.
- M$ is used to misuse maddr, there is compile time flag HONOR_MADDR
which you should have set to route such requests taking maddr into account
This seems to be the main issue, the client does not put maddr into the UDP requests. Check the Route header from the client in the TCP and UDP captures to see the difference.
Recompile SER with the option HONOR_MADDR set and it should work. If not, please provide SER output with debug=4 statement in you ser.cfg, while running the TCP usecase.
Michal
On Pá, 2007-05-04 at 09:52 +0545, KUMAR wrote:
Here are the packet captures. I was not quite sure whether I have to include packet captures from server or the UAs so i've included all
of
them. ua_A is sending INVITE to ua_B. thank you
regards kumar
On 5/3/07, Klaus Darilion klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at wrote:
Jiri Kuthan wrote: > actually I was suggesting SIP message dump (PCAP file) as
opposed to log files. -jiri
or ngrep dump:
ngrep -t -W byline -d any port 5060
regards klaus
> > At 13:10 03/05/2007, KUMAR wrote: >> Here is the message dump that i get when using TCP as transport. >>> >>> On 5/3/07, Jiri Kuthan jiri@iptel.org wrote: >>>> I think you would have to send message dumps first so that
[serusers] volunteers
>>>> have material for providing an answer. >>>> >>>> -jiri >>>> >>>> At 12:07 03/05/2007, KUMAR wrote: >>>>> - >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> I already posted this message yet havent got any replies. I
really
>>>>> need to find this out. >>>>> Please anyone reply to this problem. >>>>> >>>>> I am using SER-0.9.6 and the problem i'm having is this.
When using
>>>>> the following ser.cfg, it works well when the transport UDP
is used.
>>>>> But when transport TCP is used, then it only results in one
way IM,
>>>>> only from the UA from which the INVITE is being sent.
Moreover, when
>>>>> record_route is used instead of record_route_preset, then
even that
>>>>> one way IM doesn't work. But it works well with UDP. >>>>> >>>>> Can anyone please point me as to where the problem might be?? >>>>> Thank you in advance. >>>>> >>>>> kumar >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=ser.cfg >>>>> X-Attachment-Id: f_f18sg2bl >>>>> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ser.cfg" >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Serusers mailing list >>>>> Serusers@lists.iptel.org >>>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/ >>>> >>>> >> >> Content-Type: audio/x-pn-realaudio-plugin; name="msg_dump.rar" >> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="msg_dump.rar" >> X-Attachment-Id: f_f1949112 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Serusers mailing list >> Serusers@lists.iptel.org >> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers > > > > -- > Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/ > > _______________________________________________ > Serusers mailing list > Serusers@lists.iptel.org > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list Serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-
KUMAR -
Vaclav Kubart