18 Jul
2004
18 Jul
'04
11:16 a.m.
Hi all,
I'm sure I must be doing something very stupid! I'm using fix_nated_contact
and then t_relay(). The INVITE is being sent with a rewriten contact field,
but if the UA issues a CANCEL the private IP address is sent in the contact
field and is not rewritten.
What basic mistake have I made?!
A cut down version of my ser.cfg is:
record_route();
# loose-route processing
if (loose_route()) {
t_relay();
break;
};
fix_nated_contact();
force_rport();
if (method=="INVITE") {
fix_nated_sdp("1");
force_rtp_proxy();
/* set up reply processing */
t_on_reply("1");
setflag(6);
};
rewritehostport("213.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060");
if (!t_relay()) {
sl_reply_error();
};
# all incoming replies for t_onrepli-ed transactions enter here
onreply_route[1] {
fix_nated_contact();
if (status=~"[12][0-9][0-9]")
force_rtp_proxy();
}
18 Jul
18 Jul
11:36 a.m.
Contacts are used to advertised wherebouts for subsequent in-dialog
requests coming back to your UAC. For that reason, I don't entirely
understand why the UAC includes Contact in CANCEL at all -- all in all
CANCEL is used to discontinued estabslishment of a dialog. Anyhow,
it should not matter the Contact content is invalid since there is no
use for the header field in this case at all.
-jiri
At 11:16 AM 7/18/2004, Linus Surguy wrote:
Hi all,
I'm sure I must be doing something very stupid! I'm using fix_nated_contact
and then t_relay(). The INVITE is being sent with a rewriten contact field,
but if the UA issues a CANCEL the private IP address is sent in the contact
field and is not rewritten.
What basic mistake have I made?!
A cut down version of my ser.cfg is:
record_route();
# loose-route processing
if (loose_route()) {
t_relay();
break;
};
fix_nated_contact();
force_rport();
if (method=="INVITE") {
fix_nated_sdp("1");
force_rtp_proxy();
/* set up reply processing */
t_on_reply("1");
setflag(6);
};
rewritehostport("213.xxx.xxx.xxx:5060");
if (!t_relay()) {
sl_reply_error();
};
# all incoming replies for t_onrepli-ed transactions enter here
onreply_route[1] {
fix_nated_contact();
if (status=~"[12][0-9][0-9]")
force_rtp_proxy();
}
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
--
Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/
12:13 p.m.
Contacts are used to advertised wherebouts for
subsequent in-dialog
requests coming back to your UAC. For that reason, I don't entirely
understand why the UAC includes Contact in CANCEL at all -- all in all
CANCEL is used to discontinued estabslishment of a dialog. Anyhow,
it should not matter the Contact content is invalid since there is no
use for the header field in this case at all.
Maybe I've misinterpreted my fault then, the problem I've got exhibits
itself when the call is forwarded to an AS5300, the INVITE goes through fine
and the call is placed, but the CANCEL (UA->SER->AS5300) is responded to
with '481 call leg / transaction does not exist' and the call is not
canceled.
I had made the assumption that it was the contact header that was at fault
here as that was the obvious difference.
Linus
12:22 p.m.
Contacts are used to advertised wherebouts for
subsequent in-dialog
requests coming back to your UAC. For that reason, I don't entirely
understand why the UAC includes Contact in CANCEL at all -- all in all
CANCEL is used to discontinued estabslishment of a dialog. Anyhow,
it should not matter the Contact content is invalid since there is no
use for the header field in this case at all.
Sorry, just realised that in a half-awake state I typed rubbish. I meant
that the 'call-id' was not rewritten - don't know why I mentioned contact!
(In the INVITE to the Cisco it is blah(a)213.x.x.x and in the CANCEL to Cisco
it is blah(a)10.x.x.x
Linus
1:26 p.m.
On Jul 18, 2004 at 11:22, Linus Surguy <linus(a)magrathea-telecom.co.uk> wrote:
Then it's even stranger. ser/nathelper doesn't re-write the callid.
Maybe you have a nat box on the way, which is trying to be smart and fix
sip messages.
Andrei
Contacts are
used to advertised wherebouts for subsequent in-dialog
requests coming back to your UAC. For that reason, I don't entirely
understand why the UAC includes Contact in CANCEL at all -- all in all
CANCEL is used to discontinued estabslishment of a dialog. Anyhow,
it should not matter the Contact content is invalid since there is no
use for the header field in this case at all.
Sorry, just realised that in a half-awake state I typed rubbish. I meant
that the 'call-id' was not rewritten - don't know why I mentioned contact!
(In the INVITE to the Cisco it is blah(a)213.x.x.x and in the CANCEL to Cisco
it is blah(a)10.x.x.x
7 p.m.
On Jul 18, 2004 at 11:22, Linus Surguy
<linus(a)magrathea-telecom.co.uk>
wrote:
> > Contacts are used to advertised wherebouts
for subsequent in-dialog
> > requests coming back to your UAC. For that reason, I don't entirely
> > understand why the UAC includes Contact in CANCEL at all -- all in all
> > CANCEL is used to discontinued estabslishment of a dialog. Anyhow,
> > it should not matter the Contact content is invalid since there is no
> > use for the header field in this case at all.
>
> Sorry, just realised that in a half-awake state I typed rubbish. I meant
> that the 'call-id' was not rewritten - don't know why I mentioned
contact!
> (In the INVITE to the Cisco it is blah(a)213.x.x.x
and in the CANCEL to
Cisco
it is
blah(a)10.x.x.x
Then it's even stranger. ser/nathelper doesn't re-write the callid.
Maybe you have a nat box on the way, which is trying to be smart and fix
sip messages. 
7:19 p.m.
* Linus Surguy <linus(a)magrathea-telecom.co.uk> [040718 19:01]:
Oh great! This means that this is another broken 'feature' in the Draytek
Vigor 2600 ADSL router.
Hey, if you have problems with the draytek router, I know the norwegian
importer quite well, Give me a full report, and I'll send him it
- Atle
On Jul 18,
2004 at 11:22, Linus Surguy <linus(a)magrathea-telecom.co.uk>
wrote:
> > Contacts are used to advertised
wherebouts for subsequent in-dialog
> > requests coming back to your UAC. For that reason, I don't entirely
> > understand why the UAC includes Contact in CANCEL at all -- all in all
> > CANCEL is used to discontinued estabslishment of a dialog. Anyhow,
> > it should not matter the Contact content is invalid since there is no
> > use for the header field in this case at all.
>
> Sorry, just realised that in a half-awake state I typed rubbish. I meant
> that the 'call-id' was not rewritten - don't know why I mentioned
contact!
> (In the INVITE to the Cisco it is
blah(a)213.x.x.x and in the CANCEL to
Cisco
it is
blah(a)10.x.x.x
Then it's even stranger. ser/nathelper doesn't re-write the callid.
Maybe you have a nat box on the way, which is trying to be smart and fix
sip messages.
7412
days inactive
7412
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul -
Atle Samuelsen -
Jiri Kuthan -
Linus Surguy