18 Nov
2014
18 Nov
'14
3:42 p.m.
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one
new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for
all calls), Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace
and this behaviour didn't exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
18 Nov
18 Nov
4:53 p.m.
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5
returns false.
I also look at the force_rport. Im not sure if its related, but with
4.2.0, the Via looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-4
41\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a public
IP address (out of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
Objet : Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one
new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for
all calls), Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace
and this behaviour didnt exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
5:16 p.m.
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("*18*")) {
It may be using different parameters.
*Regards,*
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5
returns false.
I also look at the "force_rport". I'm not sure if it's related, but
with 4.2.0, the Via looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-441\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a
public IP address (out of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
*À :* sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
*Objet :* Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least,
one new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not
for all calls), Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an
old trace and this behaviour didn't exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
6 p.m.
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
De : sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Amit Patkar
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
It may be using different parameters.
Regards,
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5
returns false.
I also look at the force_rport. Im not sure if its related, but with
4.2.0, the Via looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-4
41\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a public
IP address (out of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one
new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for
all calls), Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace
and this behaviour didnt exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
19 Nov
19 Nov
4:29 p.m.
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in signaling from
socket info
(cherry picked from commit c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves the same
between the two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
À : amit(a)avhan.com; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
De : sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Amit Patkar
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
It may be using different parameters.
Regards,
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5
returns false.
I also look at the force_rport. Im not sure if its related, but with
4.2.0, the Via looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-4
41\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a public
IP address (out of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one
new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for
all calls), Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace
and this behaviour didnt exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
20 Nov
20 Nov
9 p.m.
Hello,
No one has experienced the same issue or similar until 4.2.0?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 19 novembre 2014 12:29
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com> >
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com> >
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in signaling from
socket info
(cherry picked from commit c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves the same
between the two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
À : <mailto:amit@avhan.com> amit(a)avhan.com; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing
List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
De : sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Amit Patkar
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
It may be using different parameters.
Regards,
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5
returns false.
I also look at the force_rport. Im not sure if its related, but with
4.2.0, the Via looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-4
41\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a public
IP address (out of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one
new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for
all calls), Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace
and this behaviour didnt exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
21 Nov
21 Nov
3:16 p.m.
Hello,
Just to let you know that I tried also with 4.2.1 and the issue is the same.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 20 novembre 2014 17:00
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
No one has experienced the same issue or similar until 4.2.0?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 19 novembre 2014 12:29
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com> >
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com> >
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in signaling from
socket info
(cherry picked from commit c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves the same
between the two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
À : <mailto:amit@avhan.com> amit(a)avhan.com; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing
List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
De : sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Amit Patkar
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
It may be using different parameters.
Regards,
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5
returns false.
I also look at the force_rport. Im not sure if its related, but with
4.2.0, the Via looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-4
41\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a public
IP address (out of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one
new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for
all calls), Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace
and this behaviour didnt exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
3:58 p.m.
Hello,
the commits you refer to were not related to nat_uac_test() function.
Can you send the sip message for which you used the test and is
different than in the old versions?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21/11/14 11:16, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Just to let you know that I tried also with 4.2.1 and the issue is the
same.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* jeudi 20 novembre 2014 17:00
*À :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
No one has experienced the same issue or similar until 4.2.0?
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mercredi 19 novembre 2014 12:29
*À :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com>>
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com>>
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in
signaling from socket info
(cherry picked from commit c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves the same
between the two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
*À :* amit(a)avhan.com <mailto:amit@avhan.com>; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users
Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] *De la part de* Amit Patkar
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
*À :* sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
*Objet :* Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("*18*")) {
It may be using different parameters.
*Regards,*
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with
4.1.5 returns false.
I also look at the “force_rport”. I’m not sure if it’s related,
but with 4.2.0, the Via looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-441\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to
a public IP address (out of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
*À :* sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org>
*Objet :* Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at
least, one new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and
not for all calls), Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked
into an old trace and this behaviour didn’t exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
24 Nov
24 Nov
11:43 p.m.
Hello Daniel,
Here is the SIP message:
INVITE sip:<CALLED_PARTY>@<IP_KAMAILIO>:5060 SIP/2.0\r\n
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
<IP_PSTN_GW>:5060;rport;branch=z9hG4bK-1ed2-1416853638-4045-127\r\n
Call-ID: 6929-45b-10242014182718-0-<IP_PSTN_GW>\r\n
CSeq: 1 INVITE\r\n
Max-Forwards: 70\r\n
To: <sip:<CALLED_PARTY>@<IP_KAMAILIO>:5060>\r\n
From:
"<CALLING_PARTY>"<sip:<CALLING_PARTY>@<IP_PSTN_GW>>;tag=95ffcd055e0f78f7d5d397020e89288d30b48734\r\n
User-Agent: <PSTN_GW_UA>\r\n
Timestamp: 11242014182718\r\n
P-Asserted-Identity:
"<CALLING_PARTY>"<sip:<CALLING_PARTY>@<IP_PSTN_GW>>\r\n
Contact: <sip:<CALLING_PARTY>@<IP_PSTN_GW>:5060>\r\n
Allow: INVITE, BYE, REGISTER, ACK, OPTIONS, CANCEL, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, INFO, REFER,
UPDATE\r\n
Supported: path, replaces, timer, tdialog\r\n
Session-Expires: 1800\r\n
Expires: 300\r\n
Organization: PSTN-GW\r\n
Content-Type: application/sdp\r\n
Content-Length: 302\r\n
\r\n
v=0\r\n
o=PSTN-GW_SDP 7430762 0 IN IP4 <IP_PSTN_GW>\r\n
s=PSTN-GW-SIP\r\n
c=IN IP4 <IP_RTP_PSTN_GW>\r\n
t=0 0\r\n
m=audio 8364 RTP/AVP 8 0 18 101\r\n
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000\r\n
a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000\r\n
a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000\r\n
a=fmtp:18 annexb=yes\r\n
a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000\r\n
a=fmtp:101 0-15\r\n
a=silenceSupp:off - - - -\r\n
The INVITE is routed to:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
nat_uac_test is successful whereas before it was not.
Just to let you know, below is the INVITE processed by Kamailio and sent to the end-user:
INVITE sip:<CALLED_PARTY>@<IP_END_USER>:5060 SIP/2.0\r\n
Record-Route: <sip:<IP_KAMAILIO>;lr=on;nat=yes>\r\n
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
<IP_KAMAILIO>;branch=z9hG4bK6803.0cb148ac58f43357292496d3f11f35fe.0\r\n
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
<IP_PSTN_GW>:5060;received=<IP_PSTN_GW>;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-1ed2-1416853638-4045-127\r\n
Call-ID: 6929-45b-10242014182718-0-<IP_PSTN_GW>\r\n
CSeq: 1 INVITE\r\n
Max-Forwards: 69\r\n
To: <sip:<CALLED_PARTY>@<IP_KAMAILIO>:5060>\r\n
From:
"<CALLING_PARTY>"<sip:<CALLING_PARTY>@<IP_PSTN_GW>;tag=95ffcd055e0f78f7d5d397020e89288d30b48734\r\n
User-Agent: <PSTN_GW_UA>\r\n
Timestamp: 11242014182718\r\n
P-Asserted-Identity:
"<CALLING_PARTY>"<sip:<CALLING_PARTY>@<IP_PSTN_GW>>\r\n
Contact: <sip:<CALLING_PARTY>@<IP_PSTN_GW>:5060>\r\n
Allow: INVITE, BYE, REGISTER, ACK, OPTIONS, CANCEL, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, INFO, REFER,
UPDATE\r\n
Supported: path, replaces, timer, tdialog\r\n
Session-Expires: 1800\r\n
Expires: 300\r\n
Organization: PSTN-GW\r\n
Content-Type: application/sdp\r\n
Content-Length: 315\r\n
\r\n
v=0\r\n
o=PSTN-GW_SDP 7430762 0 IN IP4 <IP_KAMAILIO>\r\n
s=PSTN-GW-SIP\r\n
c=IN IP4 <IP_KAMAILIO>\r\n
t=0 0\r\n
m=audio 35000 RTP/AVP 8 0 18 101\r\n
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000\r\n
a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000\r\n
a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000\r\n
a=fmtp:18 annexb=yes\r\n
a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000\r\n
a=fmtp:101 0-15\r\n
a=silenceSupp:off - - - -\r\n
a=nortpproxy:yes\r\n
I can confirm that the issue is present with 4.2.1 too.
No problem with 4.1.4.
The SIP message and the configuration are the same in both cases.
Thank you.
Regards,
Igor.
De : <mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Envoyé : vendredi 21 novembre 2014 11:59
À : Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
the commits you refer to were not related to nat_uac_test() function.
Can you send the sip message for which you used the test and is different than in the old
versions?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21/11/14 11:16, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Just to let you know that I tried also with 4.2.1 and the issue is the same.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 20 novembre 2014 17:00
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
No one has experienced the same issue or similar until 4.2.0?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 19 novembre 2014 12:29
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla < <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>
miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla < <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>
miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in signaling from socket info
(cherry picked from commit c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves the same between the
two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
À : <mailto:amit@avhan.com> amit(a)avhan.com; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing
List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
De : sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Amit Patkar
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
It may be using different parameters.
Regards,
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5 returns false.
I also look at the “force_rport”. I’m not sure if it’s related, but with 4.2.0, the Via
looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-441\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a public IP address (out
of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
À : sr- <mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org> users(a)lists.sip-router.org
Objet : Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one new case where
the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for all calls),
Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace and this behaviour didn’t
exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
27 Nov
27 Nov
11:30 p.m.
Hello Daniel,
Did you see something with the SIP message?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : lundi 24 novembre 2014 19:43
À : 'Daniel-Constantin Mierla'
Cc : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello Daniel,
Here is the SIP message:
[…]
I can confirm that the issue is present with 4.2.1 too.
No problem with 4.1.4.
The SIP message and the configuration are the same in both cases.
Thank you.
Regards,
Igor.
De : <mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Envoyé : vendredi 21 novembre 2014 11:59
À : Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
the commits you refer to were not related to nat_uac_test() function.
Can you send the sip message for which you used the test and is different than in the old
versions?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21/11/14 11:16, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Just to let you know that I tried also with 4.2.1 and the issue is the same.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 20 novembre 2014 17:00
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
No one has experienced the same issue or similar until 4.2.0?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 19 novembre 2014 12:29
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla < <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>
miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla < <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>
miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in signaling from socket info
(cherry picked from commit c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves the same between the
two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
À : <mailto:amit@avhan.com> amit(a)avhan.com; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing
List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
De : sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Amit Patkar
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
It may be using different parameters.
Regards,
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5 returns false.
I also look at the “force_rport”. I’m not sure if it’s related, but with 4.2.0, the Via
looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-441\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a public IP address (out
of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
À : sr- <mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org> users(a)lists.sip-router.org
Objet : Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one new case where
the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for all calls),
Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace and this behaviour didn’t
exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
1 Dec
1 Dec
3:59 p.m.
Hello,
didn't get the time to look at the INVITE trace before, checked it now
and indeed, there was an issue revealed by the extension of
received_test() function to check the presence of rport parameter. The
issue was there with the presence of received parameter in Via, but that
was not common and thus this testing function was ok for most of the case.
I just pushed patches to fix it in master, 4.2 and 4.1 branches. Let me
know if works as expected now.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 27/11/14 19:30, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Did you see something with the SIP message?
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* lundi 24 novembre 2014 19:43
*À :* 'Daniel-Constantin Mierla'
*Cc :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello Daniel,
Here is the SIP message:
[…]
I can confirm that the issue is present with 4.2.1 too.
No problem with 4.1.4.
The SIP message and the configuration are the same in both cases.
Thank you.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>] *De la part de*
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
*Envoyé :* vendredi 21 novembre 2014 11:59
*À :* Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
*Objet :* Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
the commits you refer to were not related to nat_uac_test() function.
Can you send the sip message for which you used the test and is
different than in the old versions?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21/11/14 11:16, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Just to let you know that I tried also with 4.2.1 and the issue is
the same.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* jeudi 20 novembre 2014 17:00
*À :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hello,
No one has experienced the same issue or similar until 4.2.0?
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mercredi 19 novembre 2014 12:29
*À :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous
behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com>>
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit
a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com>>
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in
signaling from socket info
(cherry picked from commit
c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves the
same between the two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
*À :* amit(a)avhan.com <mailto:amit@avhan.com>; 'Kamailio (SER) -
Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :* sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] *De la part de*
Amit Patkar
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
*À :* sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
*Objet :* Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("*18*")) {
It may be using different parameters.
*Regards,*
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas
with 4.1.5 returns false.
I also look at the “force_rport”. I’m not sure if it’s
related, but with 4.2.0, the Via looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-441\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers
to a public IP address (out of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
*À :* sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org>
*Objet :* Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at
least, one new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason
(and not for all calls), Record-Route is append with nat=yes.
I looked into an old trace and this behaviour didn’t exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda> -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
2 Dec
2 Dec
12:46 p.m.
Hello Daniel,
Thank you for the patch.
I tried it (change received_test() by received_via_test()), but the result is the same.
The INVITE was the same than the one already sent.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com]
Envoyé : lundi 1 décembre 2014 12:00
À : Igor Potjevlesch
Cc : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
didn't get the time to look at the INVITE trace before, checked it now and indeed,
there was an issue revealed by the extension of received_test() function to check the
presence of rport parameter. The issue was there with the presence of received parameter
in Via, but that was not common and thus this testing function was ok for most of the
case.
I just pushed patches to fix it in master, 4.2 and 4.1 branches. Let me know if works as
expected now.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 27/11/14 19:30, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Did you see something with the SIP message?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : lundi 24 novembre 2014 19:43
À : 'Daniel-Constantin Mierla'
Cc : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello Daniel,
Here is the SIP message:
[…]
I can confirm that the issue is present with 4.2.1 too.
No problem with 4.1.4.
The SIP message and the configuration are the same in both cases.
Thank you.
Regards,
Igor.
De : <mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Envoyé : vendredi 21 novembre 2014 11:59
À : Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
the commits you refer to were not related to nat_uac_test() function.
Can you send the sip message for which you used the test and is different than in the old
versions?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21/11/14 11:16, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Just to let you know that I tried also with 4.2.1 and the issue is the same.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 20 novembre 2014 17:00
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
No one has experienced the same issue or similar until 4.2.0?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 19 novembre 2014 12:29
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla < <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>
miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla < <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>
miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in signaling from socket info
(cherry picked from commit c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves the same between the
two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
À : <mailto:amit@avhan.com> amit(a)avhan.com; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing
List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
De : sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Amit Patkar
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
It may be using different parameters.
Regards,
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5 returns false.
I also look at the “force_rport”. I’m not sure if it’s related, but with 4.2.0, the Via
looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-441\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a public IP address (out
of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
À : sr- <mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org> users(a)lists.sip-router.org
Objet : Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one new case where
the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for all calls),
Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace and this behaviour didn’t
exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda> -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
1:53 p.m.
Hello,
did you update to latest version in the branch or you applied the patches?
If first option, then give me the output of 'kamailio -v'.
If second, can you send the patch that resulted for you, because there
were two commits?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 02/12/14 08:46, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Thank you for the patch.
I tried it (change received_test() by received_via_test()), but the
result is the same.
The INVITE was the same than the one already sent.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* lundi 1 décembre 2014 12:00
*À :* Igor Potjevlesch
*Cc :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
didn't get the time to look at the INVITE trace before, checked it now
and indeed, there was an issue revealed by the extension of
received_test() function to check the presence of rport parameter. The
issue was there with the presence of received parameter in Via, but
that was not common and thus this testing function was ok for most of
the case.
I just pushed patches to fix it in master, 4.2 and 4.1 branches. Let
me know if works as expected now.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 27/11/14 19:30, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Did you see something with the SIP message?
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* lundi 24 novembre 2014 19:43
*À :* 'Daniel-Constantin Mierla'
*Cc :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hello Daniel,
Here is the SIP message:
[…]
I can confirm that the issue is present with 4.2.1 too.
No problem with 4.1.4.
The SIP message and the configuration are the same in both cases.
Thank you.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>] *De la part de*
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
*Envoyé :* vendredi 21 novembre 2014 11:59
*À :* Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
*Objet :* Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hello,
the commits you refer to were not related to nat_uac_test() function.
Can you send the sip message for which you used the test and is
different than in the old versions?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21/11/14 11:16, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Just to let you know that I tried also with 4.2.1 and the
issue is the same.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* jeudi 20 novembre 2014 17:00
*À :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hello,
No one has experienced the same issue or similar until 4.2.0?
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mercredi 19 novembre 2014 12:29
*À :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous
behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com>>
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is
present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit
a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com
<mailto:miconda@gmail.com>>
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in
signaling from socket info
(cherry picked from commit
c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves
the same between the two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
*À :* amit(a)avhan.com <mailto:amit@avhan.com>; 'Kamailio (SER)
- Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
*De :* sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] *De la part de*
Amit Patkar
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
*À :* sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
*Objet :* Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("*18*")) {
It may be using different parameters.
*Regards,*
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas
with 4.1.5 returns false.
I also look at the “force_rport”. I’m not sure if it’s
related, but with 4.2.0, the Via looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-441\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW
refers to a public IP address (out of RFC1918 and Carrier
Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Igor Potjevlesch [mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
*À :* sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org>
*Objet :* Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there
are, at least, one new case where the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown
reason (and not for all calls), Record-Route is append
with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace and this
behaviour didn’t exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda> -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda> -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
10:44 p.m.
Hello,
Yes, second option.
Here is the diff between current module and the original one:
823c823
< different_ip = received_via_test(msg);
---
different_ip = received_test(msg);
Regards,
Igor.
De : Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 2 décembre 2014 09:54
À : Igor Potjevlesch
Cc : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
did you update to latest version in the branch or you applied the patches?
If first option, then give me the output of 'kamailio -v'.
If second, can you send the patch that resulted for you, because there were two commits?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 02/12/14 08:46, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Thank you for the patch.
I tried it (change received_test() by received_via_test()), but the result is the same.
The INVITE was the same than the one already sent.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Daniel-Constantin Mierla [ <mailto:miconda@gmail.com> mailto:miconda@gmail.com]
Envoyé : lundi 1 décembre 2014 12:00
À : Igor Potjevlesch
Cc : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
didn't get the time to look at the INVITE trace before, checked it now and indeed,
there was an issue revealed by the extension of received_test() function to check the
presence of rport parameter. The issue was there with the presence of received parameter
in Via, but that was not common and thus this testing function was ok for most of the
case.
I just pushed patches to fix it in master, 4.2 and 4.1 branches. Let me know if works as
expected now.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 27/11/14 19:30, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Did you see something with the SIP message?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : lundi 24 novembre 2014 19:43
À : 'Daniel-Constantin Mierla'
Cc : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello Daniel,
Here is the SIP message:
[…]
I can confirm that the issue is present with 4.2.1 too.
No problem with 4.1.4.
The SIP message and the configuration are the same in both cases.
Thank you.
Regards,
Igor.
De : <mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Envoyé : vendredi 21 novembre 2014 11:59
À : Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
the commits you refer to were not related to nat_uac_test() function.
Can you send the sip message for which you used the test and is different than in the old
versions?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 21/11/14 11:16, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Just to let you know that I tried also with 4.2.1 and the issue is the same.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 20 novembre 2014 17:00
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
No one has experienced the same issue or similar until 4.2.0?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 19 novembre 2014 12:29
À : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
I reviewed the changelogs.
I can see the following updates that could change the previous behaviour:
commit 42897d422b60edeac393201326a3e71318445e62
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla < <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>
miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Mon Sep 22 22:04:39 2014 +0200
core: add received parameter to via if rport parameter is present
- required by RFC3581, section 4.
(cherry picked from commit a1e96cbd5a3b43598c59cb50693e6b739801b804)
commit a52c0024723a59d90c3c3966d5deadaf8b0d4440
Author: Daniel-Constantin Mierla < <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>
miconda(a)gmail.com>
Date: Sun Sep 28 12:48:53 2014 +0200
core: helper functions to get addr and port to be used in signaling from socket info
(cherry picked from commit c725f1dec14863e069bfd1e5c26857a1005528d5)
But I can't explain why the same nat_uac_test doesn't behaves the same between the
two versions.
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 14:00
À : <mailto:amit@avhan.com> amit(a)avhan.com; 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing
List'
Objet : RE: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi Amit,
The config is the same between the two version. Even this line.
Regards,
Igor.
De : sr-users-bounces(a)lists.sip-router.org
<mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org>
[mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.sip-router.org] De la part de Amit Patkar
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 13:16
À : sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org>
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hi
You should compare this line in your configuration file.
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
It may be using different parameters.
Regards,
Amit
On 11/18/2014 5:23 PM, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
I can reproduce the issue on a pre-production system.
So, I downgraded to 4.1.5.
Here is the difference:
The INVITE comes into NATDETECT:
route[NATDETECT] {
xlog("ENTERING NATDETECT routes\n");
#!ifdef WITH_NAT
force_rport();
if (nat_uac_test("18")) {
if (is_method("REGISTER")) {
fix_nated_register();
} else {
add_contact_alias();
}
setflag(FLT_NATS);
xlog("NAT_UAC_TEST OK\n");
}
#!endif
return;
}
With Kamailio 4.2.0, the NAT_UAC_TEST returns true whereas with 4.1.5 returns false.
I also look at the “force_rport”. I’m not sure if it’s related, but with 4.2.0, the Via
looks like:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
PST_GW:5060;received=PST_GW;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-34d5-1416308856-4847-441\r\n
In 4.1.5:
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP PST_GW:5060;rport=5060;branch=z9hG4bK-2e3d-1416311184-4886-146\r\n
The received parameters is not added. Note that PSTN_GW refers to a public IP address (out
of RFC1918 and Carrier Grade NAT).
Regards,
Igor.
De : Igor Potjevlesch [ <mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com>
mailto:igor.potjevlesch@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 18 novembre 2014 11:43
À : sr- <mailto:users@lists.sip-router.org> users(a)lists.sip-router.org
Objet : Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
Since I done the upgrade of Kamailio into 4.2.0, there are, at least, one new case where
the RTPProxy is launched.
When I got an INVITE from my PSTN Gateway, for unknown reason (and not for all calls),
Record-Route is append with nat=yes. I looked into an old trace and this behaviour didn’t
exist.
What could have changed that can explain this?
Regards,
Igor.
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
<mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
<http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda> -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda> -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
3 Dec
3 Dec
1:01 p.m.
Hello,
the patch you pasted doesn't seem to be to nathelper module. Be sure you
get the one from core as well.
Cheers, Daniel
On 02/12/14 18:44, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Yes, second option.
Here is the diff between current module and the original one:
823c823
< different_ip = received_via_test(msg);
---
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
different_ip = received_test(msg);
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mardi 2 décembre 2014 09:54
*À :* Igor Potjevlesch
*Cc :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
did you update to latest version in the branch or you applied the patches?
If first option, then give me the output of 'kamailio -v'.
If second, can you send the patch that resulted for you, because there
were two commits?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 02/12/14 08:46, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Thank you for the patch.
I tried it (change received_test() by received_via_test()), but
the result is the same.
The INVITE was the same than the one already sent.
Regards,
Igor.
6:05 p.m.
Hello Daniel,
You're right. I patched nat_traversal… Sorry.
I applied the patch on nathelper and msg_translator.
It works fine now, thank you!
You will port the patch into 4.2.2?
Regards,
Igor.
De : Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 3 décembre 2014 09:01
À : Igor Potjevlesch
Cc : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
the patch you pasted doesn't seem to be to nathelper module. Be sure you get the one
from core as well.
Cheers, Daniel
On 02/12/14 18:44, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Yes, second option.
Here is the diff between current module and the original one:
823c823
< different_ip = received_via_test(msg);
---
different_ip = received_test(msg);
Regards,
Igor.
De : Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com]
Envoyé : mardi 2 décembre 2014 09:54
À : Igor Potjevlesch
Cc : 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
Objet : Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
did you update to latest version in the branch or you applied the patches?
If first option, then give me the output of 'kamailio -v'.
If second, can you send the patch that resulted for you, because there were two commits?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 02/12/14 08:46, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Thank you for the patch.
I tried it (change received_test() by received_via_test()), but the result is the same.
The INVITE was the same than the one already sent.
Regards,
Igor.
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
4 Dec
4 Dec
1:26 p.m.
Hello,
the patches were backported to 4.2 and 4.1 branches already, meaning
they will be part of 4.2.2.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 03/12/14 14:05, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
You're right. I patched nat_traversal… Sorry.
I applied the patch on nathelper and msg_translator.
It works fine now, thank you!
You will port the patch into 4.2.2?
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mercredi 3 décembre 2014 09:01
*À :* Igor Potjevlesch
*Cc :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or rtpproxy
Hello,
the patch you pasted doesn't seem to be to nathelper module. Be sure
you get the one from core as well.
Cheers, Daniel
On 02/12/14 18:44, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello,
Yes, second option.
Here is the diff between current module and the original one:
823c823
< different_ip = received_via_test(msg);
---
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
different_ip = received_test(msg);
Regards,
Igor.
*De :*Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com]
*Envoyé :* mardi 2 décembre 2014 09:54
*À :* Igor Potjevlesch
*Cc :* 'Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List'
*Objet :* Re: [SR-Users] Issue with 4.2.0 and nathelper and/or
rtpproxy
Hello,
did you update to latest version in the branch or you applied the
patches?
If first option, then give me the output of 'kamailio -v'.
If second, can you send the patch that resulted for you, because
there were two commits?
Cheers,
Daniel
On 02/12/14 08:46, Igor Potjevlesch wrote:
Hello Daniel,
Thank you for the patch.
I tried it (change received_test() by received_via_test()),
but the result is the same.
The INVITE was the same than the one already sent.
Regards,
Igor.
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda <http://twitter.com/#%21/miconda> -
http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
3435
days inactive
3451
days old
16 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Amit Patkar -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla -
Igor Potjevlesch