Re: [OpenSER-Users] Users Digest, Vol 32, Issue 70 - sr-users

23 Jan 2008

      ----- Original Message ----- 
From: users-request@lists.openser.org
To: users@lists.openser.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:28 AM
Subject: Users Digest, Vol 32, Issue 70
...
Send Users mailing list submissions to
users@lists.openser.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
users-request@lists.openser.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
users-owner@lists.openser.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Users digest..."
Today's Topics:

Forwarding to SRV records not working (James Holden)
Re: Serial fork terminated after 5 call (Bogdan-Andrei Iancu)
How to handle INVITES with different To: header (Peter P GMX)
Re: How to handle INVITES with different To: header
(Bogdan-Andrei Iancu)
Re: Forwarding to SRV records not working (Bogdan-Andrei Iancu)
OpenSER: no NOTIFY when updating PUBLISH if integrating with
OpenXCAP? (KevinKinnan)
OpenSER: no NOTIFY when updating PUBLISH if integrating with
OpenXCAP? (KevinKinnan)
Re: Problems trying to build an Active/Active OSer 1.3
cluster (Stefan Sayer)

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:41:42 +0000
From: James Holden james.holden@uk.aql.com
Subject: [OpenSER-Users] Forwarding to SRV records not working
To: users@lists.openser.org
Message-ID: 20080122164142.GD4315@james-desktop
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi,
I'm having problems with OpenSER forwarding calls to a domain where
there are only SRV records.
OpenSER seems not to perform any balancing or failover when a target
server is unavailable or gives an error.
I wish to forward calls to a number of onward gateways that at times may
not respond at all, or may respond with something like "503 Service
Unavailable".
The actual destination address is derived from an enum lookup, but it
may be for example 123456@example.com
There are SRV records as follows:
_sip._udp.example.com. 600 IN    SRV  10 50 5060 gw1.example.com.
_sip._udp.example.com. 600 IN    SRV  10 50 5060 gw2.example.com.
The behaviour I'd expect/like would be that OpenSER will distribute the
calls between the two targets specified in the SRV records, and will
fail over to the other target if one fails to respond or gives a fatal
error such as a 503.
What actually happens, is that the calls all go to the first one
regardless.
Are my expectations reasonable?
Does OpenSER's SRV record implementation work like this or am I misled?
Kind regards,
James

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:49:21 +0200
From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bogdan@voice-system.ro
Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] Serial fork terminated after 5 call
To: Sergey Babichev zaikini@yandex.ru
Cc: users@lists.openser.org
Message-ID: 47961E91.7080003@voice-system.ro
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi Sergey,
the most important thing when searching is to know where to search ;)...
See:
   http://www.openser.org/docs/modules/1.2.x/nathelper.html#AEN370
Regards,
Bogdan
Sergey Babichev wrote:
...
Okey:)) And last question about documentation, I searched documentation 
about function nat_uac_test from nathelper module for version 1.2.x and 
I'm find it in documentation for version 0.9. Openser 1.2.x not support 
function nat_uac_test or documentation 1.2.x not full?
...
Hi Sergey,
...
I'm afraid there is no docs about the errors - the idea is to have
...
sef-explaining error messages and to avoid documenting them ;)
...
Regards,
...
bogdan
...
Sergey Babichev wrote:
...
...
Thanks, where i can read about this error (discarding fwd for a 
cancelled transaction) and others?
...
...
...
...
...
Hi Sergey,
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
the "discarding fwd for a cancelled transaction" error is generated 
when
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
you try to send a request for a transaction that was already cancelled
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
from the client side. So probably the PSTN GW cancels the call while 
you
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
still want to fork a new branch.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
regards,
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Bogdan
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Sergey Babichev wrote:
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Problem is appear when i calling from PSTN. It's work fine when i 
calling from sip account to huntgroup. I think this is problem whith 
timer in my PSTN gateway.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> Hi all!
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> I want enable hunting for my extensions. It's work fine, but if my 
> hunt group consists of more then 5 extensions, call terminated and I 
> see in syslog error:
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: 
> ERROR:tm:t_forward_nonack: discarding fwd for a cancelled 
> transaction
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: 
> ERROR:tm:w_t_relay: t_forward_nonack failed
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> Jan 21 20:54:16 ser1-2 /usr/local/sbin/openser[23728]: 
> DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=5, save=0, relay=5
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> What is problem may be?
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> --
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> Best regards,
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> Sergey Babichev
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> _______________________________________________
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> Users mailing list
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> Users@lists.openser.org
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
> http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
>
>
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
--
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Best regards,
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Sergey Babichev
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...

...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Users mailing list
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Users@lists.openser.org
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
--
...
...
Best regards,
...
...
Sergey Babichev
...
...
--
Best regards,
Sergey Babichev

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:20:44 +0100
From: Peter P GMX Prometheus001@gmx.net
Subject: [OpenSER-Users] How to handle INVITES with different To:
header
To: users@lists.openser.org
Message-ID: 479633FC.2090506@gmx.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
I have the following scenario:
I receive a request with PSTN_number@my.ip.add.res from my VoIP
In alias_db I have defined a rule that  points  to yyy@myip.com which is
a registered account
After alias_db_lookup OpenSER invites as follows:
Invite yyy@myip.com
To: xxxxxxx@my.ip.add.res
The UA (actually a PBX with VoIP support) answers with 404 not found.
When I invite as follows:
Invite yyy@myip.com
To: yyy@myip.com
everything works fine.
My question: How do you handle these cases?
Rewriting the To: part seems dificult and will mess up a lot - hein?
Kind regards
Peter

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:41:32 +0200
From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bogdan@voice-system.ro
Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] How to handle INVITES with different To:
header
To: Prometheus001@gmx.net
Cc: users@lists.openser.org
Message-ID: 479646EC.5090301@voice-system.ro
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi Peter,
According to RFC3261, in SIP, routing is exclusively done based on RURI
(and eventually Route hdrs). TO header has 0 implication in routing.
So, your PBX is deprecated and out of standards and I suggest either
upgrade, either replacement.
Regards,
Bogdan
Peter P GMX wrote:
...
I have the following scenario:
I receive a request with PSTN_number@my.ip.add.res from my VoIP
In alias_db I have defined a rule that  points  to yyy@myip.com which is
a registered account
After alias_db_lookup OpenSER invites as follows:
Invite yyy@myip.com
To: xxxxxxx@my.ip.add.res
The UA (actually a PBX with VoIP support) answers with 404 not found.
When I invite as follows:
Invite yyy@myip.com
To: yyy@myip.com
everything works fine.
My question: How do you handle these cases?
Rewriting the To: part seems dificult and will mess up a lot - hein?
Kind regards
Peter

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:00:28 +0200
From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bogdan@voice-system.ro
Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Users] Forwarding to SRV records not working
To: James Holden james.holden@uk.aql.com
Cc: users@lists.openser.org
Message-ID: 4796596C.7000004@voice-system.ro
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi James,
Openser does not do balancing over records with same priority - it will
just use the first (as returned by DNS server).
But failover based on NAPTR and SRV records is in place.
Regards,
Bogdan
James Holden wrote:
...
Hi,
I'm having problems with OpenSER forwarding calls to a domain where
there are only SRV records.
OpenSER seems not to perform any balancing or failover when a target
server is unavailable or gives an error.
I wish to forward calls to a number of onward gateways that at times may
not respond at all, or may respond with something like "503 Service
Unavailable".
The actual destination address is derived from an enum lookup, but it
may be for example 123456@example.com
There are SRV records as follows:
_sip._udp.example.com. 600 IN    SRV  10 50 5060 gw1.example.com.
_sip._udp.example.com. 600 IN    SRV  10 50 5060 gw2.example.com.
The behaviour I'd expect/like would be that OpenSER will distribute the
calls between the two targets specified in the SRV records, and will
fail over to the other target if one fails to respond or gives a fatal
error such as a 503.
What actually happens, is that the calls all go to the first one
regardless.
Are my expectations reasonable?
Does OpenSER's SRV record implementation work like this or am I misled?
Kind regards,
James

Users mailing list
Users@lists.openser.org
http://lists.openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Message: 6
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:49:18 +0800
From: KevinKinnan kinnan2224@hotmail.com
Subject: [OpenSER-Users] OpenSER: no NOTIFY when updating PUBLISH if
integrating with OpenXCAP?
To: users@lists.openser.org
Message-ID: BAY126-W641A1FEB850E880B28F56C43E0@phx.gbl
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Thank you so much, Franz!
Indeed, the problem is coming from xml. It is well-formed but seems the 
server can't understand it.
The whole xml document I used is the similar with yours except the root 
element with namespace which
is showing below:
<cr: ruleset xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:common-policy"
                 xmlns:pr="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pres-rules"
                 xmlns:cr="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:common-policy">
I got no error sending the xml doc with this as beginning. Only no Notify 
message after updating Publish,
and sometimes the first Subscribe can't get through that  is no Notify 
sending back from server. It's really
weired! Anyway, I finally fix it with your advise, Thanks Indeed.
Kevin,

????? MSN ??????????
http://mobile.msn.com.cn/