9 Nov
2005
9 Nov
'05
10:54 a.m.
Hi!
I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The INVITE comes
in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060. Responses and ACK
will be handled correctly - on call leg uses port 6060, the other call
leg 5050.
If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will be
forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a problem in the
BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser behaving wrong here? Or do I
have to configure special routing for this scenario?
thanks
klaus
BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
.
BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be sent
from 6060.
#
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
Max-Forwards: 10.
Record-Route:
<sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
.
10 Nov
10 Nov
7:04 a.m.
Hi Klaus,
the change of ports on INVITE time should be reflected in double record
routing (with both ports) in order to ensure that the sequential
request will follow the same port path. So, the question is, can you
confirm the double RR in the outgoing INVITE from openser?
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Hi!
I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The INVITE
comes in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060. Responses
and ACK will be handled correctly - on call leg uses port 6060, the
other call leg 5050.
If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will be
forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a problem in
the BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser behaving wrong here?
Or do I have to configure special routing for this scenario?
thanks
klaus
BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
.
BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be sent
from 6060.
#
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
Max-Forwards: 10.
Record-Route:
<sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
11 Nov
11 Nov
4:58 a.m.
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
the change of ports on INVITE time should be reflected in double record
routing (with both ports) in order to ensure that the sequential
request will follow the same port path. So, the question is, can you
confirm the double RR in the outgoing INVITE from openser?
Yes, double RR works fine. As you see in the BYE:
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
both RR are present (Cisco is a strcit router, thus one RR is int eh
request URI, the second one is in the Route header).
Should openser change the sending socket according to the second Route
URI? I've also tried with a loose_router as callee and it again does not
work.
klaus
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Hi!
I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The INVITE
comes in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060. Responses
and ACK will be handled correctly - on call leg uses port 6060, the
other call leg 5050.
If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will be
forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a problem in
the BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser behaving wrong here?
Or do I have to configure special routing for this scenario?
thanks
klaus
BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
.
BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be sent
from 6060.
#
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
Max-Forwards: 10.
Record-Route:
<sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
5:22 a.m.
Hi Klaus,
I will have a look on this, but looks to be a problem in RR module -
socket selection. This problem was fixed before the release, but seams
that only for "after loose router" case and not also for "after strict
router" case.
See http://openser.org/pipermail/devel/2005-October/000774.html.
can you switch the CISCO to loose route? just to see if works....
in the mean while, please submit a bug report on the tracker.
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
the change of ports on INVITE time should be reflected in double
record routing (with both ports) in order to ensure that the
sequential request will follow the same port path. So, the question
is, can you confirm the double RR in the outgoing INVITE from openser?
Yes, double RR works fine. As you see in the BYE:
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
both RR are present (Cisco is a strcit router, thus one RR is int eh
request URI, the second one is in the Route header).
Should openser change the sending socket according to the second Route
URI? I've also tried with a loose_router as callee and it again does
not work.
klaus
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Hi!
I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The INVITE
comes in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060. Responses
and ACK will be handled correctly - on call leg uses port 6060, the
other call leg 5050.
If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will be
forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a problem in
the BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser behaving wrong here?
Or do I have to configure special routing for this scenario?
thanks
klaus
BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
.
BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be
sent from 6060.
#
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
Max-Forwards: 10.
Record-Route:
<sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
7:42 a.m.
I tried with asterisk (=loose router) and there is the same problem
klaus
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I will have a look on this, but looks to be a problem in RR module -
socket selection. This problem was fixed before the release, but seams
that only for "after loose router" case and not also for "after strict
router" case.
See http://openser.org/pipermail/devel/2005-October/000774.html.
can you switch the CISCO to loose route? just to see if works....
in the mean while, please submit a bug report on the tracker.
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
the change of ports on INVITE time should be reflected in double
record routing (with both ports) in order to ensure that the
sequential request will follow the same port path. So, the question
is, can you confirm the double RR in the outgoing INVITE from openser?
Yes, double RR works fine. As you see in the BYE:
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
both RR are present (Cisco is a strcit router, thus one RR is int eh
request URI, the second one is in the Route header).
Should openser change the sending socket according to the second Route
URI? I've also tried with a loose_router as callee and it again does
not work.
klaus
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Hi!
I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The INVITE
comes in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060. Responses
and ACK will be handled correctly - on call leg uses port 6060, the
other call leg 5050.
If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will be
forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a problem in
the BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser behaving wrong here?
Or do I have to configure special routing for this scenario?
thanks
klaus
BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
.
BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be
sent from 6060.
#
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
Max-Forwards: 10.
Record-Route:
<sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
8:05 a.m.
Klaus Darilion wrote:
I tried with asterisk (=loose router) and there is the
same problem
stop! I've detected that asterisk (old version) behaves totally wrong ;-)
more news to come...
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I will have a look on this, but looks to be a problem in RR module -
socket selection. This problem was fixed before the release, but seams
that only for "after loose router" case and not also for "after strict
router" case.
See http://openser.org/pipermail/devel/2005-October/000774.html.
can you switch the CISCO to loose route? just to see if works....
in the mean while, please submit a bug report on the tracker.
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
the change of ports on INVITE time should be reflected in double
record routing (with both ports) in order to ensure that the
sequential request will follow the same port path. So, the question
is, can you confirm the double RR in the outgoing INVITE from openser?
Yes, double RR works fine. As you see in the BYE:
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
both RR are present (Cisco is a strcit router, thus one RR is int eh
request URI, the second one is in the Route header).
Should openser change the sending socket according to the second
Route URI? I've also tried with a loose_router as callee and it again
does not work.
klaus
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The INVITE
> comes in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060. Responses
> and ACK will be handled correctly - on call leg uses port 6060, the
> other call leg 5050.
>
> If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will
> be forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a
> problem in the BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser behaving
> wrong here? Or do I have to configure special routing for this
> scenario?
>
> thanks
> klaus
>
> BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
>
> U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
> BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
> From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
> To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
> Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
> CSeq: 101 BYE.
> User-Agent: CSCO/6.
> Content-Length: 0.
> RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
> RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
> Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
> <sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
> .
>
> BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be
> sent from 6060.
>
> #
> U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
> BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
> Max-Forwards: 10.
> Record-Route:
> <sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
>
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
> From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
> To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
> Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
> CSeq: 101 BYE.
> User-Agent: CSCO/6.
> Content-Length: 0.
> RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
> RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
> .
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users(a)openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
8:15 a.m.
Klaus Darilion wrote:
I tried with asterisk (=loose router) and there is the
same problem
AFAIK, lookup("location") also sets the according sending socket. Does
it also overwrite already enforced sockets with force_send_socket?
Problem: I always want to use port 5060 for outgoing messages except for
calls routed to clients REGISTERed at port 6060. Is it save to use:
force_send_socket(ip:5060);
lookup("location");
regards
klaus
klaus
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I will have a look on this, but looks to be a problem in RR module -
socket selection. This problem was fixed before the release, but seams
that only for "after loose router" case and not also for "after strict
router" case.
See http://openser.org/pipermail/devel/2005-October/000774.html.
can you switch the CISCO to loose route? just to see if works....
in the mean while, please submit a bug report on the tracker.
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
the change of ports on INVITE time should be reflected in double
record routing (with both ports) in order to ensure that the
sequential request will follow the same port path. So, the question
is, can you confirm the double RR in the outgoing INVITE from openser?
Yes, double RR works fine. As you see in the BYE:
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
both RR are present (Cisco is a strcit router, thus one RR is int eh
request URI, the second one is in the Route header).
Should openser change the sending socket according to the second
Route URI? I've also tried with a loose_router as callee and it again
does not work.
klaus
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The INVITE
> comes in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060. Responses
> and ACK will be handled correctly - on call leg uses port 6060, the
> other call leg 5050.
>
> If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will
> be forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a
> problem in the BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser behaving
> wrong here? Or do I have to configure special routing for this
> scenario?
>
> thanks
> klaus
>
> BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
>
> U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
> BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
> From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
> To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
> Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
> CSeq: 101 BYE.
> User-Agent: CSCO/6.
> Content-Length: 0.
> RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
> RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
> Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
> <sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
> .
>
> BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be
> sent from 6060.
>
> #
> U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
> BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
> Max-Forwards: 10.
> Record-Route:
> <sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
>
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
> From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
> To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
> Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
> CSeq: 101 BYE.
> User-Agent: CSCO/6.
> Content-Length: 0.
> RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
> RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
> .
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users(a)openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
8:38 a.m.
Hi Klaus,
yes, the lookup function will override all the time the force socket- it
forces the socket on which the register was received.
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Klaus Darilion wrote:
I tried with asterisk (=loose router) and there
is the same problem
AFAIK, lookup("location") also sets the according sending socket. Does
it also overwrite already enforced sockets with force_send_socket?
Problem: I always want to use port 5060 for outgoing messages except
for calls routed to clients REGISTERed at port 6060. Is it save to use:
force_send_socket(ip:5060);
lookup("location");
regards
klaus
klaus
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I will have a look on this, but looks to be a problem in RR module -
socket selection. This problem was fixed before the release, but
seams that only for "after loose router" case and not also for
"after strict router" case.
See http://openser.org/pipermail/devel/2005-October/000774.html.
can you switch the CISCO to loose route? just to see if works....
in the mean while, please submit a bug report on the tracker.
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> Hi Klaus,
>
> the change of ports on INVITE time should be reflected in double
> record routing (with both ports) in order to ensure that the
> sequential request will follow the same port path. So, the
> question is, can you confirm the double RR in the outgoing INVITE
> from openser?
Yes, double RR works fine. As you see in the BYE:
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
both RR are present (Cisco is a strcit router, thus one RR is int
eh request URI, the second one is in the Route header).
Should openser change the sending socket according to the second
Route URI? I've also tried with a loose_router as callee and it
again does not work.
klaus
>
> regards,
> bogdan
>
> Klaus Darilion wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The
>> INVITE comes in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060.
>> Responses and ACK will be handled correctly - on call leg uses
>> port 6060, the other call leg 5050.
>>
>> If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will
>> be forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a
>> problem in the BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser
>> behaving wrong here? Or do I have to configure special routing
>> for this scenario?
>>
>> thanks
>> klaus
>>
>> BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
>>
>> U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
>> BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
>> From:
>> <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
>> To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
>> Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
>> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
>> CSeq: 101 BYE.
>> User-Agent: CSCO/6.
>> Content-Length: 0.
>> RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
>> RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
>> Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
>> <sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
>> .
>>
>> BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be
>> sent from 6060.
>>
>> #
>> U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
>> BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
>> Max-Forwards: 10.
>> Record-Route:
>> <sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
>>
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
>> From:
>> <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
>> To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
>> Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
>> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
>> CSeq: 101 BYE.
>> User-Agent: CSCO/6.
>> Content-Length: 0.
>> RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
>> RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
>> .
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users(a)openser.org
>> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>
>
8:27 a.m.
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I will have a look on this, but looks to be a problem in RR module -
socket selection. This problem was fixed before the release, but seams
that only for "after loose router" case and not also for "after strict
router" case.
See http://openser.org/pipermail/devel/2005-October/000774.html.
can you switch the CISCO to loose route? just to see if works....
i've tried with x-lite (loose_router) and it worked fine.
in the mean while, please submit a bug report on the tracker.
done
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
the change of ports on INVITE time should be reflected in double
record routing (with both ports) in order to ensure that the
sequential request will follow the same port path. So, the question
is, can you confirm the double RR in the outgoing INVITE from openser?
Yes, double RR works fine. As you see in the BYE:
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
both RR are present (Cisco is a strcit router, thus one RR is int eh
request URI, the second one is in the Route header).
Should openser change the sending socket according to the second Route
URI? I've also tried with a loose_router as callee and it again does
not work.
klaus
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Hi!
I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The INVITE
comes in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060. Responses
and ACK will be handled correctly - on call leg uses port 6060, the
other call leg 5050.
If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will be
forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a problem in
the BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser behaving wrong here?
Or do I have to configure special routing for this scenario?
thanks
klaus
BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
.
BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be
sent from 6060.
#
U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
Max-Forwards: 10.
Record-Route:
<sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
From: <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
CSeq: 101 BYE.
User-Agent: CSCO/6.
Content-Length: 0.
RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
.
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)openser.org
http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
17 Nov
17 Nov
12:05 p.m.
Hi Klaus,
I just committed a fixup for the socket setting in after strict routing
case. Please give it a try and let me know if work properly.
Best regards,
Bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
I will have a look on this, but looks to be a problem in RR module -
socket selection. This problem was fixed before the release, but
seams that only for "after loose router" case and not also for "after
strict router" case.
See http://openser.org/pipermail/devel/2005-October/000774.html.
can you switch the CISCO to loose route? just to see if works....
i've tried with x-lite (loose_router) and it worked fine.
in the mean while, please submit a bug report on the tracker.
done
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi Klaus,
the change of ports on INVITE time should be reflected in double
record routing (with both ports) in order to ensure that the
sequential request will follow the same port path. So, the
question is, can you confirm the double RR in the outgoing INVITE
from openser?
Yes, double RR works fine. As you see in the BYE:
BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
<sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
both RR are present (Cisco is a strcit router, thus one RR is int eh
request URI, the second one is in the Route header).
Should openser change the sending socket according to the second
Route URI? I've also tried with a loose_router as callee and it
again does not work.
klaus
regards,
bogdan
Klaus Darilion wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've configure openser to listen also on port udp:6060. The INVITE
> comes in to 6060, forwarded to other client on port 5060.
> Responses and ACK will be handled correctly - on call leg uses
> port 6060, the other call leg 5050.
>
> If now the callee sends a BYE (Cisco, strict router) the BYE will
> be forwarded from port 5060 instead of 6060. I didn't find a
> problem in the BYE request sent to the openser. Is openser
> behaving wrong here? Or do I have to configure special routing for
> this scenario?
>
> thanks
> klaus
>
> BYE from callee (5060) to proxy
>
> U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.254756 83.136.33.19:5060 -> 83.136.32.83:5060
> BYE sip:83.136.32.83:5060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on SIP/2.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
> From:
> <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
> To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
> Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
> CSeq: 101 BYE.
> User-Agent: CSCO/6.
> Content-Length: 0.
> RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
> RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
> Route: <sip:83.136.32.83:6060;r2=on;ftag=a613b273;nat=yes;lr=on>,
> <sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404>.
> .
>
> BYE from proxy to caller: is sent from 5060 althouth it should be
> sent from 6060.
>
> #
> U 2005/11/09 16:47:48.264940 83.136.32.83:5060 -> 84.20.167.143:7404
> BYE sip:klaus@84.20.167.143:7404 SIP/2.0.
> Max-Forwards: 10.
> Record-Route:
> <sip:83.136.32.83;ftag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073;nat=yes;lr=on>.
>
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.32.83;branch=z9hG4bKaf5b.fbc8b274.0.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 83.136.33.19:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3dc73e84.
> From:
> <sip:01505641636@enum.at>;tag=000dedfb04cc011e597bda33-277ea073.
> To: klaus enum.at<sip:klaus@enum.at>;tag=a613b273.
> Call-ID: 7f49f21ed451bb7a.
> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:47:47 GMT.
> CSeq: 101 BYE.
> User-Agent: CSCO/6.
> Content-Length: 0.
> RTP-RxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??,LatePkt=??,LostPkt=??,AvgJit=??.
> RTP-TxStat: Dur=??,Pkt=??,Oct=??.
> .
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users(a)openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
6808
days inactive
6816
days old
9 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu -
Klaus Darilion