[Users] Please help for TLS testing..

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

[Users] I got an error 478,what...

[Users] Route-header DNS lookup?

Stephen Paterson

21 Jul 2006 21 Jul '06

10:22 a.m.

Hi Ferianto,

...

As I see, the error is at line 27. I see that it contain "tls_verify=1" and "tls_require_certificate=0". I don't know what is wrong with this line because As I see from all mailinglist`s messages, they didn`t change this line and if they change it, they just change the value, for example : tls_verify = on tls_require_certificate = on

I've just started using OpenSER today as well and had the same problem. After a little guess work I got it to work using: tls_verify_client, tls_verify_server & tls_require_client_certificate instead of tls_verify & tls_require_certificate I couldn't find this documented anywhere but it may be, I don't know my way around the docs yet. Regards Steve Steve Paterson Software Engineer Aculab Tel: +44 (0) 1908 273866 Fax: +44 (0) 1908 273801 Email: mailto:stephen.paterson@aculab.com Website: http://www.aculab.com

Show replies by date

Stephen Paterson

21 Jul 21 Jul

10:52 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Hi all, I've just started using OpenSER to test our SIP implementation and have encountered a problem with TLS early on. I can register with the server without any problem but my calls fail. The logging from the server shows: Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: loose_route: Error while parsing Request URI Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: do_action:error in expression Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: do_action:error in expression This would suggest that my (for example) From header contains a URI of: <sip:>! Not overly useful you might say. Now, the same INVITE without encryption works fine with OpenSER (using either TCP or UDP) and a serialisation of the INVITE immediately before encryption (shown below) shows the correct URIs in all the right places. INVITE sips:steve@10.202.200.132 SIP/2.0 From: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132>;tag=ACU-6975-c47afeff To: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132> Contact: <sips:10.202.200.143:5061> Call-ID: 42041801-00000878-44C0E778-00000001(a)192.168.6.91 CSeq: 26984 INVITE Content-Length: 281 Content-Type: application/sdp Allow: INVITE Allow: ACK Allow: BYE Allow: CANCEL Allow: OPTIONS Allow: NOTIFY Allow: REFER Allow: PRACK Allow: INFO Allow: UPDATE Accept: application/sdp Accept: application/isup Accept: application/qsig Accept: multipart/mixed Accept-Encoding: identity Accept-Language: en Supported: replaces Supported: 100rel Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 10.202.200.143:5061;branch=z9hG4bKeb10b5f6-18c6-11db-bff7-971e76d819bf Max-Forwards: 70 Route: <sips:10.202.200.132:5061;lr> ... SDP omitted For the moment I am pretty much assuming that this is a problem with our implementation as it is still under development but I can't work out what. 2 questions: 1. Does anyone have any general thoughts as to what might be going wrong? 2. Is it possible to get more logging from OpenSER that might shed some light? Regards Steve Steve Paterson Software Engineer Aculab Tel: +44 (0) 1908 273866 Fax: +44 (0) 1908 273801 Email: mailto:stephen.paterson@aculab.com Website: http://www.aculab.com

Stephen Paterson

25 Jul 25 Jul

7:20 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Hi all, I'm posting this again due to lack of response. If this is the wrong forum for this kind of query, please could someone let me know of a list that would be more appropriate. After further investigation and successful testing against other UAs I am less inclined to believe that the problem lies with our TLS implementation, rather that the problem lies with OpenSER. Regards Steve -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Paterson Sent: 21 July 2006 15:52 To: 'users(a)openser.org' Subject: Error parsing URI's using TLS Hi all, I've just started using OpenSER to test our SIP implementation and have encountered a problem with TLS early on. I can register with the server without any problem but my calls fail. The logging from the server shows: Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: loose_route: Error while parsing Request URI Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: do_action:error in expression Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: do_action:error in expression This would suggest that my (for example) From header contains a URI of: <sip:>! Not overly useful you might say. Now, the same INVITE without encryption works fine with OpenSER (using either TCP or UDP) and a serialisation of the INVITE immediately before encryption (shown below) shows the correct URIs in all the right places. INVITE sips:steve@10.202.200.132 SIP/2.0 From: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132>;tag=ACU-6975-c47afeff To: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132> Contact: <sips:10.202.200.143:5061> Call-ID: 42041801-00000878-44C0E778-00000001(a)192.168.6.91 CSeq: 26984 INVITE Content-Length: 281 Content-Type: application/sdp Allow: INVITE Allow: ACK Allow: BYE Allow: CANCEL Allow: OPTIONS Allow: NOTIFY Allow: REFER Allow: PRACK Allow: INFO Allow: UPDATE Accept: application/sdp Accept: application/isup Accept: application/qsig Accept: multipart/mixed Accept-Encoding: identity Accept-Language: en Supported: replaces Supported: 100rel Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 10.202.200.143:5061;branch=z9hG4bKeb10b5f6-18c6-11db-bff7-971e76d819bf Max-Forwards: 70 Route: <sips:10.202.200.132:5061;lr> ... SDP omitted For the moment I am pretty much assuming that this is a problem with our implementation as it is still under development but I can't work out what. 2 questions: 1. Does anyone have any general thoughts as to what might be going wrong? 2. Is it possible to get more logging from OpenSER that might shed some light? Regards Steve Steve Paterson Software Engineer Aculab Tel: +44 (0) 1908 273866 Fax: +44 (0) 1908 273801 Email: mailto:stephen.paterson@aculab.com Website: http://www.aculab.com

Cesc

7:22 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

mmm ... not sure, but i see u are trying to use sips: ... it is just a gut feeling, but i don't think ser/openser has full support of it ... and you probably just stumbled against a proof. Cesc On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com> wrote:

...

Stephen Paterson

7:48 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Thanks Cesc, that would explain things. I'll ask the developers list about known issues in this area before I carry on. Regards Steve -----Original Message----- From: Cesc [mailto:cesc.santa@gmail.com] Sent: 25 July 2006 12:23 To: Stephen Paterson Cc: users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS mmm ... not sure, but i see u are trying to use sips: ... it is just a gut feeling, but i don't think ser/openser has full support of it ... and you probably just stumbled against a proof. Cesc On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com> wrote:

...

Klaus Darilion

7:39 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote:

...

Daniel-Constantin Mierla

7:57 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Seeing the error messages stack I see that the error occurs first during the loose_route() processing. Did some other method changed the r-uri before? Maybe the config file will help to see what could be wrong - the snippet from main route till loose_route() should do it. To be sure that the r-uri as it comes from upstream is valid or not, add the following at the beginning of the main route block: xlog("received request uri is [$ru]\n"); The xlog function parses the r-uri to be sure it is valid. Cheers, Daniel On 07/25/06 14:39, Klaus Darilion wrote:

...

That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote:

_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Stephen Paterson

8:17 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Hi Daniel, If I add this line (xlog("received request uri is [$ru]\n");) to the beginning of route (shown below) openser won't start complaining about a bad config file, is there a typo maybe? A shame as it would be nice to see that in the log - I'm finding it difficult to be confident that what we are sending is correct as it is encrypted! I didn't notice before but I am also receiving a 513 as the final response but the check in the following bit of code is before loose_route (the message is also only a little over 1KB). Is this the config snippet you meant? route{ # log("received request uri is [$ru]\n"); -- openser will not start with this line uncommented # initial sanity checks -- messages with # max_forwards==0, or excessively long requests if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) { sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops"); exit; }; if (msg:len >= 2048 ) { sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); exit; }; # we record-route all messages -- to make sure that # subsequent messages will go through our proxy; that's # particularly good if upstream and downstream entities # use different transport protocol if (!method=="REGISTER") record_route(); # subsequent messages withing a dialog should take the # path determined by record-routing if (loose_route()) { # mark routing logic in request append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n"); route(1); };

...

Did some other method changed the r-uri before?

I guess you mean in the config file but just in case, I have not altered the source so it should be exactly as is in openser-1.1.0-tls.src.tar.gz. Cheers Steve -----Original Message----- From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:daniel@voice-system.ro] Sent: 25 July 2006 12:57 To: Klaus Darilion; Stephen Paterson Cc: users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS Seeing the error messages stack I see that the error occurs first during the loose_route() processing. Did some other method changed the r-uri before? Maybe the config file will help to see what could be wrong - the snippet from main route till loose_route() should do it. To be sure that the r-uri as it comes from upstream is valid or not, add the following at the beginning of the main route block: xlog("received request uri is [$ru]\n"); The xlog function parses the r-uri to be sure it is valid. Cheers, Daniel On 07/25/06 14:39, Klaus Darilion wrote:

...

That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote:

_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Cesc

8:20 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

it should be xlog ... not log cesc On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com> wrote:

...

Did some other method changed the r-uri before?

That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote:

_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Daniel-Constantin Mierla

8:24 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Hello Stephen, On 07/25/06 15:17, Stephen Paterson wrote:

...

it must be xlog("...") instead of log("..."). And you must load xlog module to have the function available in script. You can print the incoming message to the syslog via: xlog("received message [[$mb]]\n\n"); Watch the logs to see what you receive from the net. Cheers, Daniel

...

# initial sanity checks -- messages with # max_forwards==0, or excessively long requests if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) { sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops"); exit; }; if (msg:len >= 2048 ) { sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); exit; }; # we record-route all messages -- to make sure that # subsequent messages will go through our proxy; that's # particularly good if upstream and downstream entities # use different transport protocol if (!method=="REGISTER") record_route(); # subsequent messages withing a dialog should take the # path determined by record-routing if (loose_route()) { # mark routing logic in request append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n"); route(1); };

Did some other method changed the r-uri before?

That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote:

_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Stephen Paterson

8:40 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Thanks, it was actually xlog I used, just a lazy cut and paste into the email. I didn't load the xlog module though. When I do I get: Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: received request uri is [sips:steve@10.202.200.132] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: received request uri is [sips:steve@10.202.200.132] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 last message repeated 10 times Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: xl_get_ruri: ERROR while parsing the R-URI Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: received request uri is [<null>] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: loose_route: Error while parsing Request URI Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: WARNING: do_action:error in expression Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: WARNING: do_action:error in expression This look to me like the URI is correct on receipt but is somehow lost during the parsing. Would the developer's forum be a more appropriate place for this? It looks like a bug. I've also had a suggestion from Cesc that openser is possibly not yet that stable when it comes to the sips scheme (I guess it was implemented using transport=tls). Cheers Steve -----Original Message----- From: users-bounces(a)openser.org [mailto:users-bounces@openser.org]On Behalf Of Daniel-Constantin Mierla Sent: 25 July 2006 13:24 To: Stephen Paterson Cc: users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS Hello Stephen, On 07/25/06 15:17, Stephen Paterson wrote:

...

Did some other method changed the r-uri before?

That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote:

_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Cesc

8:58 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Actually ... it already struck me when you posted your message ... INVITE sips:steve@10.202.200.132 SIP/2.0 From: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132>;tag=ACU-6975-c47afeff To: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132> Contact: <sips:10.202.200.143:5061> Call-ID: 42041801-00000878-44C0E778-00000001(a)192.168.6.91 CSeq: 26984 INVITE Content-Length: 281 Content-Type: application/sdp Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 10.202.200.143:5061;branch=z9hG4bKeb10b5f6-18c6-11db-bff7-971e76d819bf Max-Forwards: 70 Route: <sips:10.202.200.132:5061;lr> You have a loop ... don't you? From and To are the same ... ok ... contact isn't (but it is missing the user part) ... but the request uri is yourself again ... what are the IPs of the UAs and Proxies involved? You mention that u had your "own" application? i think you are doing something wrong there ... which triggers some error in openser ... Cesc On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com> wrote:

...

Did some other method changed the r-uri before?

That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote:

_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Stephen Paterson

9:17 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

...

Did some other method changed the r-uri before?

That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote:

_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Cesc

9:34 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

No problem in terminating to yourself ... but i mentioned the loop not just because that. In the log you sent, you mention ... [skipped] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: received request uri is [sips:steve@10.202.200.132] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 last message repeated 10 times Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) [skipped] so ... if the same message at the beggining of your main route is repeated 10 times, it means that you get 10 times the same message ... or you pasted the same xlog 10 times along your config file? I would add this also at the beginning ... xlog("received message [[$mb]]\n\n"); print the received message ... you may discover the "loop" ... Cesc PS - your application sends a contact without user part ... you may want to improve that ... On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com> wrote:

...

Did some other method changed the r-uri before?

That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm posting this again due to lack of response. If this is the wrong > forum for this kind of query, please could someone let me know of a > list that would be more appropriate. After further investigation and > successful testing against other UAs I am less inclined to believe > that the problem lies with our TLS implementation, rather that the > problem lies with OpenSER. > > Regards > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Paterson Sent: 21 July 2006 15:52 > To: 'users(a)openser.org' > Subject: Error parsing URI's using TLS > > > Hi all, > > I've just started using OpenSER to test our SIP implementation and > have encountered a problem with TLS early on. I can register with the > server without any problem but my calls fail. The logging from the > server shows: > > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: > verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: > verify_callback: depth = 0 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: > verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: > verify_callback: depth = 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: > verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: > verify_callback: depth = 0 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: > verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri > too short: <sip:> (4) > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: > parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: loose_route: Error > while parsing Request URI > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri > too short: <sip:> (4) > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: > parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: > do_action:error in expression > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri > too short: <sip:> (4) > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: > parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> > Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: > do_action:error in expression > > This would suggest that my (for example) From header contains a URI > of: <sip:>! Not overly useful you might say. Now, the same INVITE > without encryption works fine with OpenSER (using either TCP or UDP) > and a serialisation of the INVITE immediately before encryption > (shown below) shows the correct URIs in all the right places. > > INVITE sips:steve@10.202.200.132 SIP/2.0 > From: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132>;tag=ACU-6975-c47afeff > To: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132> > Contact: <sips:10.202.200.143:5061> > Call-ID: 42041801-00000878-44C0E778-00000001(a)192.168.6.91 > CSeq: 26984 INVITE > Content-Length: 281 > Content-Type: application/sdp > Allow: INVITE > Allow: ACK > Allow: BYE > Allow: CANCEL > Allow: OPTIONS > Allow: NOTIFY > Allow: REFER > Allow: PRACK > Allow: INFO > Allow: UPDATE > Accept: application/sdp > Accept: application/isup > Accept: application/qsig > Accept: multipart/mixed > Accept-Encoding: identity > Accept-Language: en > Supported: replaces > Supported: 100rel > Via: SIP/2.0/TLS > 10.202.200.143:5061;branch=z9hG4bKeb10b5f6-18c6-11db-bff7-971e76d819bf > Max-Forwards: 70 > Route: <sips:10.202.200.132:5061;lr> > > ... SDP omitted > > For the moment I am pretty much assuming that this is a problem with > our implementation as it is still under development but I can't work > out what. 2 questions: > > 1. Does anyone have any general thoughts as to what might be going > wrong? > 2. Is it possible to get more logging from OpenSER that might shed > some light? > > Regards > > Steve > > Steve Paterson > Software Engineer > Aculab > Tel: +44 (0) 1908 273866 > Fax: +44 (0) 1908 273801 > Email: mailto:stephen.paterson@aculab.com > Website: http://www.aculab.com > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users(a)openser.org > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

Stephen Paterson

11:11 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Well, the failed parsing is something of a red herring - it has exposed a bug in my ACK which only manifests on receipt of a non-200 response. I've worked out how to enable lots more logging and looking at it, openser seems to run through several iterations of something or other and by the time it's finished the INVITE contains 6 Record-Route headers (all identical), 7 Via headers (all identical but the original) and 6 identical P-hint headers. It then is over 2048 bytes and the 513 is sent. Does anyone know why it's complaining about big messages for transports other than UDP? When I remove the message too big check from the config I start getting a 483 - too many hops. Looking at the logs it shows openser stuck in a loop adding Via, Record-Route & P-hint headers. All the while it is decrementing Max-Forwards so it does eventually break out of this loop. It looks like openser is forwarding the INVITE to itself. This should terminate with loop detected after one iteration but it carries on for 70 until Max-Forwards = 0. I can't work out why it would be doing this. Any thoughts? Cheers Steve P.S. Cesc. To put your mind at rest, the contact header is configurable to have a user part. I'm just lazy :) -----Original Message----- From: users-bounces(a)openser.org [mailto:users-bounces@openser.org]On Behalf Of Cesc Sent: 25 July 2006 14:35 To: Stephen Paterson Cc: users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS No problem in terminating to yourself ... but i mentioned the loop not just because that. In the log you sent, you mention ... [skipped] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: received request uri is [sips:steve@10.202.200.132] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 last message repeated 10 times Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) [skipped] so ... if the same message at the beggining of your main route is repeated 10 times, it means that you get 10 times the same message ... or you pasted the same xlog 10 times along your config file? I would add this also at the beginning ... xlog("received message [[$mb]]\n\n"); print the received message ... you may discover the "loop" ... Cesc PS - your application sends a contact without user part ... you may want to improve that ... On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com> wrote:

...

Did some other method changed the r-uri before?

_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

samuel

11:29 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

try to add an alias statement containing the domain your server is responsible for....i recall it gave some trouble if I don't put it and only set TLS... alias=10.202.200.132 Hope it solves it, samuel. 2006/7/25, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com>om>:

...

It's not really a loop in the sense of 'loop detected' - both ends of

the 'loop' terminate the messaging. So I register my UA with the proxy ( steve@blah) and call steve@blah from the same UA - just makes it easier to test while in development. You need a UA that can handle multiple calls of course. That isn't the problem though. If openser thinks this is a loop detected it is wrong. A loop detection is where a request has been routed back to a proxy that previously forwarded the request thereby creating a situation where the request will be forwarded indefinitely. There is nothing wrong with terminating a call on the same equipment that originated the call.

Cheers Steve -----Original Message----- From: Cesc [mailto:cesc.santa@gmail.com] Sent: 25 July 2006 13:59 To: Stephen Paterson Cc: daniel(a)voice-system.ro; users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS Actually ... it already struck me when you posted your message ... INVITE sips:steve@10.202.200.132 SIP/2.0 From: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132>;tag=ACU-6975-c47afeff To: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132> Contact: <sips:10.202.200.143:5061> Call-ID: 42041801-00000878-44C0E778-00000001(a)192.168.6.91 CSeq: 26984 INVITE Content-Length: 281 Content-Type: application/sdp Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 10.202.200.143:5061;branch=z9hG4bKeb10b5f6-18c6-11db-bff7-971e76d819bf Max-Forwards: 70 Route: <sips:10.202.200.132:5061;lr> You have a loop ... don't you? From and To are the same ... ok ... contact isn't (but it is missing the user part) ... but the request uri is yourself again ... what are the IPs of the UAs and Proxies involved? You mention that u had your "own" application? i think you are doing something wrong there ... which triggers some error in openser ... Cesc On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com> wrote: > Thanks, it was actually xlog I used, just a lazy cut and paste into

the email. I didn't load the xlog module though. When I do I get:

> > Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: received request uri is [

sips:steve@10.202.200.132]

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init:

verify_callback: depth = 1

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init:

verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init:

verify_callback: depth = 0

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init:

verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init:

verify_callback: depth = 1

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init:

verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init:

verify_callback: depth = 0

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init:

verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: received request uri is [

sips:steve@10.202.200.132]

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 last message repeated 10 times > Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too

short: <sip:> (4)

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri:

bad uri <sip:>

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: xl_get_ruri: ERROR while

parsing the R-URI

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: received request uri is

[<null>]

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too

short: <sip:> (4)

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri:

bad uri <sip:>

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: loose_route: Error while

parsing Request URI

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too

short: <sip:> (4)

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri:

bad uri <sip:>

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: WARNING: do_action:error

in expression

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too

short: <sip:> (4)

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri:

bad uri <sip:>

> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: WARNING: do_action:error

in expression

> > This look to me like the URI is correct on receipt but is somehow lost

during the parsing.

> > Would the developer's forum be a more appropriate place for this? It

looks like a bug. I've also had a suggestion from Cesc that openser is possibly not yet that stable when it comes to the sips scheme (I guess it was implemented using transport=tls).

> > Cheers > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: users-bounces(a)openser.org [mailto:users-bounces@openser.org]On > Behalf Of Daniel-Constantin Mierla > Sent: 25 July 2006 13:24 > To: Stephen Paterson > Cc: users(a)openser.org > Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS > > > Hello Stephen, > > > > On 07/25/06 15:17, Stephen Paterson wrote: > > Hi Daniel, > > > > If I add this line (xlog("received request uri is [$ru]\n");) to the

beginning of route (shown below) openser won't start complaining about a bad config file, is there a typo maybe? A shame as it would be nice to see that in the log - I'm finding it difficult to be confident that what we are sending is correct as it is encrypted! I didn't notice before but I am also receiving a 513 as the final response but the check in the following bit of code is before loose_route (the message is also only a little over 1KB).

> > > > Is this the config snippet you meant? > > > > route{ > > # log("received request uri is [$ru]\n"); -- openser will not

start with this line uncommented

> > > > it must be xlog("...") instead of log("..."). > > And you must load xlog module to have the function available in

script.

> > You can print the incoming message to the syslog via: > > xlog("received message [[$mb]]\n\n"); > > Watch the logs to see what you receive from the net. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > > # initial sanity checks -- messages with > > # max_forwards==0, or excessively long requests > > if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) { > > sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops"); > > exit; > > }; > > > > if (msg:len >= 2048 ) { > > sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); > > exit; > > }; > > > > # we record-route all messages -- to make sure that > > # subsequent messages will go through our proxy; that's > > # particularly good if upstream and downstream entities > > # use different transport protocol > > if (!method=="REGISTER") > > record_route(); > > > > # subsequent messages withing a dialog should take the > > # path determined by record-routing > > if (loose_route()) { > > # mark routing logic in request > > append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n"); > > route(1); > > }; > > > > > >> Did some other method changed the r-uri before? > >> > > I guess you mean in the config file but just in case, I have not

altered the source so it should be exactly as is in openser-1.1.0-tls.src.tar.gz.

> > > > Cheers > > > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:daniel@voice-system.ro] > > Sent: 25 July 2006 12:57 > > To: Klaus Darilion; Stephen Paterson > > Cc: users(a)openser.org > > Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS > > > > > > Seeing the error messages stack I see that the error occurs first

during

> > the loose_route() processing. Did some other method changed the

r-uri

> > before? Maybe the config file will help to see what could be wrong -

the

> > snippet from main route till loose_route() should do it. > > > > To be sure that the r-uri as it comes from upstream is valid or not,

add

> > the following at the beginning of the main route block: > > > > xlog("received request uri is [$ru]\n"); > > > > The xlog function parses the r-uri to be sure it is valid. > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel > > > > > > On 07/25/06 14:39, Klaus Darilion wrote: > > > >> That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients

(SNOM,

> >> eyebeam, minisip)? > >> > >> regards > >> klaus > >> > >> Stephen Paterson wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I'm posting this again due to lack of response. If this is the

wrong

> >>> forum for this kind of query, please could someone let me know of

> >>> list that would be more appropriate. After further investigation

and

> >>> successful testing against other UAs I am less inclined to believe > >>> that the problem lies with our TLS implementation, rather that the > >>> problem lies with OpenSER. > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> > >>> Steve > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Stephen Paterson Sent: 21 July 2006 15:52 > >>> To: 'users(a)openser.org' > >>> Subject: Error parsing URI's using TLS > >>> > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I've just started using OpenSER to test our SIP implementation and > >>> have encountered a problem with TLS early on. I can register with

the

> >>> server without any problem but my calls fail. The logging from the > >>> server shows: > >>> > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: > >>> verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: > >>> verify_callback: depth = 0 > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: > >>> verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: > >>> verify_callback: depth = 1 > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: > >>> verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: > >>> verify_callback: depth = 0 > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: > >>> verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri:

uri

> >>> too short: <sip:> (4) > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: > >>> parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: loose_route: Error > >>> while parsing Request URI > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri:

uri

> >>> too short: <sip:> (4) > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: > >>> parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: > >>> do_action:error in expression > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri:

uri

> >>> too short: <sip:> (4) > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: > >>> parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> > >>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: > >>> do_action:error in expression > >>> > >>> This would suggest that my (for example) From header contains a

URI

> >>> of: <sip:>! Not overly useful you might say. Now, the same INVITE > >>> without encryption works fine with OpenSER (using either TCP or

UDP)

> >>> and a serialisation of the INVITE immediately before encryption > >>> (shown below) shows the correct URIs in all the right places. > >>> > >>> INVITE sips:steve@10.202.200.132 SIP/2.0 > >>> From: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132>;tag=ACU-6975-c47afeff > >>> To: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132> > >>> Contact: <sips:10.202.200.143:5061> > >>> Call-ID: 42041801-00000878-44C0E778-00000001(a)192.168.6.91 > >>> CSeq: 26984 INVITE > >>> Content-Length: 281 > >>> Content-Type: application/sdp > >>> Allow: INVITE > >>> Allow: ACK > >>> Allow: BYE > >>> Allow: CANCEL > >>> Allow: OPTIONS > >>> Allow: NOTIFY > >>> Allow: REFER > >>> Allow: PRACK > >>> Allow: INFO > >>> Allow: UPDATE > >>> Accept: application/sdp > >>> Accept: application/isup > >>> Accept: application/qsig > >>> Accept: multipart/mixed > >>> Accept-Encoding: identity > >>> Accept-Language: en > >>> Supported: replaces > >>> Supported: 100rel > >>> Via: SIP/2.0/TLS > >>> 10.202.200.143:5061

;branch=z9hG4bKeb10b5f6-18c6-11db-bff7-971e76d819bf

> >>> Max-Forwards: 70 > >>> Route: <sips:10.202.200.132:5061;lr> > >>> > >>> ... SDP omitted > >>> > >>> For the moment I am pretty much assuming that this is a problem

with

> >>> our implementation as it is still under development but I can't

work

>> out what. 2 questions: >> >> 1. Does anyone have any general thoughts as to what might be going >> wrong? >> 2. Is it possible to get more logging from OpenSER that might shed >> some light? >> >> Regards >> >> Steve >> >> Steve Paterson >> Software Engineer >> Aculab >> Tel: +44 (0) 1908 273866 >> Fax: +44 (0) 1908 273801 >> Email: mailto:stephen.paterson@aculab.com >> Website: http://www.aculab.com >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> Users(a)openser.org >> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >> > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users(a)openser.org > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > >

samuel

11:32 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

message rejected because the thread was already too big....re-sending a short version... 2006/7/25, samuel <samu60(a)gmail.com>om>:

...

Klaus Darilion

11:38 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Stephen Paterson wrote:

...

No, sending to itself is not necessarily a loop, e.g. if the request URI changes. Then this is a spiral which is allowed. Maybe there could be better loop detection alogrithm, but openser only uses the Max-forwards count.

...

for 70 until Max-Forwards = 0. I can't work out why it would be doing this.

If you want to see the looped messages sniff on the loopback device too. ngrep -d any ... tcpdump -i any ... The problem must be in your openser.cfg. Somewhere in the routing logic you have to change the request URI - manually or by lookup() (if the client is registered). In-dialog should then be forwarded correctly in loose_route block. regards klaus

...

Any thoughts? Cheers Steve P.S. Cesc. To put your mind at rest, the contact header is configurable to have a user part. I'm just lazy :) -----Original Message----- From: users-bounces(a)openser.org [mailto:users-bounces@openser.org]On Behalf Of Cesc Sent: 25 July 2006 14:35 To: Stephen Paterson Cc: users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS No problem in terminating to yourself ... but i mentioned the loop not just because that. In the log you sent, you mention ... [skipped] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: received request uri is [sips:steve@10.202.200.132] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 last message repeated 10 times Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) [skipped] so ... if the same message at the beggining of your main route is repeated 10 times, it means that you get 10 times the same message ... or you pasted the same xlog 10 times along your config file? I would add this also at the beginning ... xlog("received message [[$mb]]\n\n"); print the received message ... you may discover the "loop" ... Cesc PS - your application sends a contact without user part ... you may want to improve that ... On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com> wrote:

It's not really a loop in the sense of 'loop detected' - both ends of the 'loop' terminate the messaging. So I register my UA with the proxy (steve@blah) and call steve@blah from the same UA - just makes it easier to test while in development. You need a UA that can handle multiple calls of course. That isn't the problem though. If openser thinks this is a loop detected it is wrong. A loop detection is where a request has been routed back to a proxy that previously forwarded the request thereby creating a situation where the request will be forwarded indefinitely. There is nothing wrong with terminating a call on the same equipment that originated the call. Cheers Steve -----Original Message----- From: Cesc [mailto:cesc.santa@gmail.com] Sent: 25 July 2006 13:59 To: Stephen Paterson Cc: daniel(a)voice-system.ro; users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS Actually ... it already struck me when you posted your message ... INVITE sips:steve@10.202.200.132 SIP/2.0 From: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132>;tag=ACU-6975-c47afeff To: steve <sips:steve@10.202.200.132> Contact: <sips:10.202.200.143:5061> Call-ID: 42041801-00000878-44C0E778-00000001(a)192.168.6.91 CSeq: 26984 INVITE Content-Length: 281 Content-Type: application/sdp Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 10.202.200.143:5061;branch=z9hG4bKeb10b5f6-18c6-11db-bff7-971e76d819bf Max-Forwards: 70 Route: <sips:10.202.200.132:5061;lr> You have a loop ... don't you? From and To are the same ... ok ... contact isn't (but it is missing the user part) ... but the request uri is yourself again ... what are the IPs of the UAs and Proxies involved? You mention that u had your "own" application? i think you are doing something wrong there ... which triggers some error in openser ... Cesc On 7/25/06, Stephen Paterson <Stephen.Paterson(a)aculab.com> wrote: > Thanks, it was actually xlog I used, just a lazy cut and paste > into the email. I didn't load the xlog module though. When I do I > get: > > Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: received request uri > is [sips:steve@10.202.200.132] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3916]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 1 Jul 25 > 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init: verify_callback: > preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3916]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 25 > 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: tls_init: verify_callback: > preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 1 Jul 25 > 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: > preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 25 > 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3917]: tls_init: verify_callback: > preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3917]: received request uri is > [sips:steve@10.202.200.132] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 last > message repeated 10 times Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul > 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: > parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3916]: xl_get_ruri: ERROR while parsing the R-URI Jul > 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: received request uri is > [<null>] Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: > parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 25 > 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: loose_route: Error while > parsing Request URI Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: > ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 25 13:35:41 > sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri > <sip:> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: WARNING: > do_action:error in expression Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3916]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul > 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 ./openser[3916]: ERROR: > parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 25 13:35:41 sip-fedora3 > ./openser[3916]: WARNING: do_action:error in expression > > This look to me like the URI is correct on receipt but is somehow > lost during the parsing. > > Would the developer's forum be a more appropriate place for this? > It looks like a bug. I've also had a suggestion from Cesc that > openser is possibly not yet that stable when it comes to the sips > scheme (I guess it was implemented using transport=tls). > > Cheers > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- From: users-bounces(a)openser.org > [mailto:users-bounces@openser.org]On Behalf Of Daniel-Constantin > Mierla Sent: 25 July 2006 13:24 To: Stephen Paterson Cc: > users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using > TLS > > > Hello Stephen, > > > > On 07/25/06 15:17, Stephen Paterson wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> If I add this line (xlog("received request uri is [$ru]\n");) >> to the beginning of route (shown below) openser won't start >> complaining about a bad config file, is there a typo maybe? A >> shame as it would be nice to see that in the log - I'm finding >> it difficult to be confident that what we are sending is >> correct as it is encrypted! I didn't notice before but I am >> also receiving a 513 as the final response but the check in the >> following bit of code is before loose_route (the message is >> also only a little over 1KB). >> >> Is this the config snippet you meant? >> >> route{ # log("received request uri is [$ru]\n"); -- openser >> will not start with this line uncommented >> > it must be xlog("...") instead of log("..."). > > And you must load xlog module to have the function available in > script. > > You can print the incoming message to the syslog via: > > xlog("received message [[$mb]]\n\n"); > > Watch the logs to see what you receive from the net. > > Cheers, Daniel > >> # initial sanity checks -- messages with # max_forwards==0, or >> excessively long requests if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) >> { sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops"); exit; }; >> >> if (msg:len >= 2048 ) { sl_send_reply("513", "Message too >> big"); exit; }; >> >> # we record-route all messages -- to make sure that # >> subsequent messages will go through our proxy; that's # >> particularly good if upstream and downstream entities # use >> different transport protocol if (!method=="REGISTER") >> record_route(); >> >> # subsequent messages withing a dialog should take the # path >> determined by record-routing if (loose_route()) { # mark >> routing logic in request append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n"); >> route(1); }; >> >> >>> Did some other method changed the r-uri before? >>> >> I guess you mean in the config file but just in case, I have >> not altered the source so it should be exactly as is in >> openser-1.1.0-tls.src.tar.gz. >> >> Cheers >> >> Steve >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla >> [mailto:daniel@voice-system.ro] Sent: 25 July 2006 12:57 To: >> Klaus Darilion; Stephen Paterson Cc: users(a)openser.org Subject: >> Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS >> >> >> Seeing the error messages stack I see that the error occurs >> first during the loose_route() processing. Did some other >> method changed the r-uri before? Maybe the config file will >> help to see what could be wrong - the snippet from main route >> till loose_route() should do it. >> >> To be sure that the r-uri as it comes from upstream is valid or >> not, add the following at the beginning of the main route >> block: >> >> xlog("received request uri is [$ru]\n"); >> >> The xlog function parses the r-uri to be sure it is valid. >> >> Cheers, Daniel >> >> >> On 07/25/06 14:39, Klaus Darilion wrote: >> >>> That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS >>> clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? >>> >>> regards klaus >>> >>> Stephen Paterson wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I'm posting this again due to lack of response. If this is >>>> the wrong forum for this kind of query, please could >>>> someone let me know of a list that would be more >>>> appropriate. After further investigation and successful >>>> testing against other UAs I am less inclined to believe >>>> that the problem lies with our TLS implementation, rather >>>> that the problem lies with OpenSER. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Paterson Sent: 21 >>>> July 2006 15:52 To: 'users(a)openser.org' Subject: Error >>>> parsing URI's using TLS >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I've just started using OpenSER to test our SIP >>>> implementation and have encountered a problem with TLS >>>> early on. I can register with the server without any >>>> problem but my calls fail. The logging from the server >>>> shows: >>>> >>>> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: >>>> verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 >>>> 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: tls_init: >>>> verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 >>>> ./openser[14880]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is >>>> good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 >>>> ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: depth = 1 Jul >>>> 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: >>>> verify_callback: preverify is good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 >>>> 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14881]: tls_init: >>>> verify_callback: depth = 0 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 >>>> ./openser[14881]: tls_init: verify_callback: preverify is >>>> good: verify return: 1 Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 >>>> ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> >>>> (4) Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: >>>> parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 21 15:40:54 >>>> sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: loose_route: Error while >>>> parsing Request URI Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 >>>> ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> >>>> (4) Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: >>>> parse_sip_msg_uri: bad uri <sip:> Jul 21 15:40:54 >>>> sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: WARNING: do_action:error in >>>> expression Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: >>>> ERROR: parse_uri: uri too short: <sip:> (4) Jul 21 15:40:54 >>>> sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: ERROR: parse_sip_msg_uri: bad >>>> uri <sip:> Jul 21 15:40:54 sip-fedora3 ./openser[14880]: >>>> WARNING: do_action:error in expression >>>> >>>> This would suggest that my (for example) From header >>>> contains a URI of: <sip:>! Not overly useful you might say. >>>> Now, the same INVITE without encryption works fine with >>>> OpenSER (using either TCP or UDP) and a serialisation of >>>> the INVITE immediately before encryption (shown below) >>>> shows the correct URIs in all the right places. >>>> >>>> INVITE sips:steve@10.202.200.132 SIP/2.0 From: steve >>>> <sips:steve@10.202.200.132>;tag=ACU-6975-c47afeff To: steve >>>> <sips:steve@10.202.200.132> Contact: >>>> <sips:10.202.200.143:5061> Call-ID: >>>> 42041801-00000878-44C0E778-00000001(a)192.168.6.91 CSeq: >>>> 26984 INVITE Content-Length: 281 Content-Type: >>>> application/sdp Allow: INVITE Allow: ACK Allow: BYE Allow: >>>> CANCEL Allow: OPTIONS Allow: NOTIFY Allow: REFER Allow: >>>> PRACK Allow: INFO Allow: UPDATE Accept: application/sdp >>>> Accept: application/isup Accept: application/qsig Accept: >>>> multipart/mixed Accept-Encoding: identity Accept-Language: >>>> en Supported: replaces Supported: 100rel Via: SIP/2.0/TLS >>>> 10.202.200.143:5061;branch=z9hG4bKeb10b5f6-18c6-11db-bff7-971e76d819bf >>>> Max-Forwards: 70 Route: <sips:10.202.200.132:5061;lr> >>>> >>>> ... SDP omitted >>>> >>>> For the moment I am pretty much assuming that this is a >>>> problem with our implementation as it is still under >>>> development but I can't work out what. 2 questions: >>>> >>>> 1. Does anyone have any general thoughts as to what might >>>> be going wrong? 2. Is it possible to get more logging from >>>> OpenSER that might shed some light? >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> Steve Paterson Software Engineer Aculab Tel: +44 (0) 1908 >>>> 273866 Fax: +44 (0) 1908 273801 Email: >>>> mailto:stephen.paterson@aculab.com Website: >>>> http://www.aculab.com >>>> _______________________________________________ Users >>>> mailing list Users(a)openser.org >>>> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ Users mailing >>> list Users(a)openser.org >>> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ Users mailing > list Users(a)openser.org > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ Users mailing > list Users(a)openser.org > http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users >

Cesc

12:03 p.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

On 7/25/06, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:

...

I agree with you ... but i don't think he had in mind a spiral ;) ... so, he's got a loop in his config file ... Cesc

Stephen Paterson

31 Jul 31 Jul

4:50 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Hi all, Sorry for the delay, I've been away for a bit. I stumbled across the source of the problem in a eureka moment though. It was the REGISTER that was the problem after all, I was a bit lazy setting that up. I was registering sip:blah@openser instead of sips:blah@openser so when I came to make a call to sips:blah@openser it all went wrong. Having fixed that, all is good in the world. Thanks for all your help. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Cesc [mailto:cesc.santa@gmail.com] Sent: 25 July 2006 17:04 To: Klaus Darilion Cc: Stephen Paterson; users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS On 7/25/06, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote:

...

I agree with you ... but i don't think he had in mind a spiral ;) ... so, he's got a loop in his config file ... Cesc

Stephen Paterson

25 Jul 25 Jul

7:57 a.m.

New subject: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS

Hi Klaus, We work with Snom and it is essentially the same INVITE, only the actual values of the URI's are different (and those tags & parameters that need to be unique). The really strange part for me is that the same URIs are present in the REGISTER which works fine. I'm aware that INVITEs and REGISTERs are likely to follow radically different code paths but I would have thought that the URI parser would be common to both. I'll be trying eyebeam and minisip next but I wanted to get a proxy running so I could test outbound calls to Snom 360 (which will only accept incoming calls from a proxy, not direct from a UA). Regards Steve -----Original Message----- From: Klaus Darilion [mailto:klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at] Sent: 25 July 2006 12:40 To: Stephen Paterson Cc: users(a)openser.org Subject: Re: [Users] Error parsing URI's using TLS That lok sindeed very strange. HAve you tried other TLS clients (SNOM, eyebeam, minisip)? regards klaus Stephen Paterson wrote:

...

Klaus Darilion

24 Jul 24 Jul

3:49 a.m.

Stephen Paterson wrote:

...

Hi Ferianto,

http://openser.org/docs/tls.html regards klaus

6776

days inactive

6786

days old

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

Manage subscription

21 comments

5 participants

tags (0)

participants (5)

Cesc
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Klaus Darilion
samuel
Stephen Paterson