Dear Paul:
I am a new user of SER sip. And would you please tell me an explain about what the RPID is??
I want to control the call to PSTN with B2BUA of vovida or Asterisk.
Best Regard Charles
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:33:26 -0500, Java Rockx javarockx@gmail.com wrote:
Vitaly,
I believe you are correct that RPID is only helpful during SIP->PSTN calls.
I'm not real familiar with B2BUA, but if I were to introduce one in to my system, does that mean I need to have all the RTP traffic pass through my network as well, or does the B2BUA only deal with SIP messaging?
Regards, Paul
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:14:18 -0500, Vitaly Nikolaev vitaly@voipsonic.com wrote:
The answer is B2BUA
There actually two ways,
First is b2bua which is nice (for me ok.. I like it :)
Second if you assign the CallerID number to device.. the real callerid, (for example in my network we use some fake numbers into devices and then change it do real callerid (did) in b2bua), then some devices, for example SIPURA, can send Anonymous as name in From and Contact and some GWs, will use it and hide callerid on outgoing call.
And third:
And there are also Remote-Party-Id: field in SIP that partially supported by SER and supported by most of GW and carriers, and that is probably RIGHT way to do that.
When PSTN GW sends call to outside of ur network, it no just skip callerid, u can do it but it is wrong, it make it private, so usual ppl will not see it but for example 911 and some toll free subscriber will see. That right way and that how everybody should do cli blocking.
What is wrong in this method is that if you call goes from SIP to SIP and you use as me fake CLI on devices, customers will see fake numbers because as far as I know SIP devices does not support RPID (please correct me if I am wrong) so in my case I will have to use combination of N1 and N3..
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On Behalf Of Java Rockx Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:20 AM To: Klaus Darilion Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: [Serusers] Manipulate from_uri
Klaus,
I realize that RFC3261 says do not modify the From header, however, my question is this;
When making SIP-to-SIP calls between two subscribers on the same SIP proxy, how can one implement Caller ID Block when RPID is not usually honored by SIP UAs - since this is really for PSTN gateways?
It seems that altering the From header in this case is the only option. Have I missed something?
Regards, Paul
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:00:14 +0100, Klaus Darilion klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at wrote:
Hi Mik!
Do not modify the From: or To: URI - this is not allowed (RFC 3261) and will cause problems.
regards, klaus
Mik Cheez wrote:
Since I'm able to modify the URI for relaying, I would assume there would be a way to modify the FROM_URI as well. Has anyone managed to do this with SER acting as a proxy? Any other possible avenues to modify the CALLID?
Best regards
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Sure
RPID is Remote-Party-Id: field in SIP that tell to outgoing GW what value and setting put in CallerID when GW will terminate call to .. whatever
Read this:
Readme for module auth_db Readme for module Auth URL: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122newft/122 t/122t13/ftsipext.htm
May be it not best document, but it will tell you what is rpid and why you need it
In short: You put in ser: modparam("auth", "rpid_prefix", "Name <sip:") modparam("auth", "rpid_suffix", "@sip.frontlineglobal.net;user=phone>;party=calling;screen=yes;privacy=off")
Name can be any, screen=yes means CallerID is trusted, some carried sekip it if see screen=no, privacy=off means who CLI to remote party (on or full - caller id blocking)
This is for kind of static thing, and I did not find way (almost half year ago) to make it dynamic.., per customer, per call
Then u do:
append_rpid_hf(); on INVITE
and then SER will take value that It received from database during authorize and append prefix/suffix and send it in SIP header.
README is quite good, just read it and you will how exact idea how to use it
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On Behalf Of Charles Wang Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:41 PM To: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: [Serusers] Manipulate from_uri
Dear Paul:
I am a new user of SER sip. And would you please tell me an explain about what the RPID is??
I want to control the call to PSTN with B2BUA of vovida or Asterisk.
Best Regard Charles
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:33:26 -0500, Java Rockx javarockx@gmail.com wrote:
Vitaly,
I believe you are correct that RPID is only helpful during SIP->PSTN
calls.
I'm not real familiar with B2BUA, but if I were to introduce one in to my system, does that mean I need to have all the RTP traffic pass through my network as well, or does the B2BUA only deal with SIP messaging?
Regards, Paul
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:14:18 -0500, Vitaly Nikolaev vitaly@voipsonic.com wrote:
The answer is B2BUA
There actually two ways,
First is b2bua which is nice (for me ok.. I like it :)
Second if you assign the CallerID number to device.. the real callerid,
(for
example in my network we use some fake numbers into devices and then
change
it do real callerid (did) in b2bua), then some devices, for example
SIPURA,
can send Anonymous as name in From and Contact and some GWs, will use it
and
hide callerid on outgoing call.
And third:
And there are also Remote-Party-Id: field in SIP that partially
supported by
SER and supported by most of GW and carriers, and that is probably RIGHT
way
to do that.
When PSTN GW sends call to outside of ur network, it no just skip
callerid,
u can do it but it is wrong, it make it private, so usual ppl will not
see
it but for example 911 and some toll free subscriber will see. That
right
way and that how everybody should do cli blocking.
What is wrong in this method is that if you call goes from SIP to SIP
and
you use as me fake CLI on devices, customers will see fake numbers
because
as far as I know SIP devices does not support RPID (please correct me if
I
am wrong) so in my case I will have to use combination of N1 and N3..
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On Behalf Of Java Rockx Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:20 AM To: Klaus Darilion Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: [Serusers] Manipulate from_uri
Klaus,
I realize that RFC3261 says do not modify the From header, however, my question is this;
When making SIP-to-SIP calls between two subscribers on the same SIP proxy, how can one implement Caller ID Block when RPID is not usually honored by SIP UAs - since this is really for PSTN gateways?
It seems that altering the From header in this case is the only option. Have I missed something?
Regards, Paul
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:00:14 +0100, Klaus Darilion klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at wrote:
Hi Mik!
Do not modify the From: or To: URI - this is not allowed (RFC 3261)
and
will cause problems.
regards, klaus
Mik Cheez wrote:
Since I'm able to modify the URI for relaying, I would assume there would be a way to modify the FROM_URI as well. Has anyone managed
to do
this with SER acting as a proxy? Any other possible avenues to
modify
the CALLID?
Best regards
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
_______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
This is for kind of static thing, and I did not find way (almost half year ago) to make it dynamic.., per customer, per call
append_rpid_hf() can accept parameters, so you can make it a little dynamic. For example, some UA changes caller name after activating blocking caller-id, you can add "privacy=yes" in the rpid header.
There is another way which is totally dynamic. You can use avpops to load the rpid and add it to the header. Hopefully someone (Elena? :) can come up with some functions to manipulate avp values. That will make it possible to modify rpid on the fly.
Richard
Many thanks for parameters for append_rpid_hf, that will work perfect for me.
Is avpops is something that could be used already in production? Using external routing script made me lazy to check new features in ser :)
-----Original Message----- From: Richard [mailto:richard@o-matrix.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 1:04 PM To: 'Vitaly Nikolaev'; serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: RE: [Serusers] Manipulate from_uri
This is for kind of static thing, and I did not find way (almost half year ago) to make it dynamic.., per customer, per call
append_rpid_hf() can accept parameters, so you can make it a little dynamic. For example, some UA changes caller name after activating blocking caller-id, you can add "privacy=yes" in the rpid header.
There is another way which is totally dynamic. You can use avpops to load the rpid and add it to the header. Hopefully someone (Elena? :) can come up with some functions to manipulate avp values. That will make it possible to modify rpid on the fly.
Richard
Is avpops is something that could be used already in production? Using external routing script made me lazy to check new features in ser :)
We use it extensively in production. You can probably wait for new functions coming out before considering switch from external routing script in order to get the performance gain. The particular functions I'd like to have are avp value manipulation and loading any sip header into an avp. Also lots of existing functions will probably be enhanced to take advantage of avps, e.g. prefix() and strip().
Richard
Richard wrote:
Is avpops is something that could be used already in production? Using external routing script made me lazy to check new features in ser :)
We use it extensively in production. You can probably wait for new functions coming out before considering switch from external routing script in order to get the performance gain. The particular functions I'd like to have are avp value manipulation and loading any sip header into an avp.
Loading the content of any header in an AVP structure should not be a big issue -- I will try to find some time to add it, although I already tried several times in the last month :).
Also lots of existing functions will probably be enhanced to take advantage of avps, e.g. prefix() and strip().
These are methods working directly on R-URI username. prefix() will be covered by string concatenation, strip can be another operation with avps.
Ramona
Richard
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 10:19:32PM +0100, Elena Ramona Modroiu wrote:
Richard wrote:
Is avpops is something that could be used already in production? Using external routing script made me lazy to check new features in ser :)
We use it extensively in production. You can probably wait for new functions coming out before considering switch from external routing script in order to get the performance gain. The particular functions I'd like to have are avp value manipulation and loading any sip header into an avp.
Loading the content of any header in an AVP structure should not be a big issue -- I will try to find some time to add it, although I already tried several times in the last month :).
I have just committed headers' body support for avp_write().
Ramona
Richard wrote:
This is for kind of static thing, and I did not find way (almost half year ago) to make it dynamic.., per customer, per call
append_rpid_hf() can accept parameters, so you can make it a little dynamic. For example, some UA changes caller name after activating blocking caller-id, you can add "privacy=yes" in the rpid header.
There is another way which is totally dynamic. You can use avpops to load the rpid and add it to the header. Hopefully someone (Elena? :) can come up with some functions to manipulate avp values.
The functionality will be included in avpops, but I cannot give an exact time line right now. There are a lot of operations that can be performed with avps and I should make a list with priorities, perhaps math operations with integers and string concatenation would be the first. Also, conversions from int to string and vice-versa...
Ramona
That will make it possible to modify rpid on the fly.
Richard
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
The functionality will be included in avpops, but I cannot give an exact time line right now. There are a lot of operations that can be performed with avps and I should make a list with priorities, perhaps math operations with integers and string concatenation would be the first. Also, conversions from int to string and vice-versa...
string concatenation is probably the most valuable.
math with integer, can't think of an application.
conversions between int and string, would it be transparent to user? For example, inv-timeout uses int value. In avp_write("16", "s:inv-timeout"), we didn't specify if 16 is a number or not, is it string by default? Also in the db table, avp type is 0, meaning string value. We haven't encountered any problem.
Thanks, Richard
Richard wrote:
The functionality will be included in avpops, but I cannot give an exact time line right now. There are a lot of operations that can be performed with avps and I should make a list with priorities, perhaps math operations with integers and string concatenation would be the first. Also, conversions from int to string and vice-versa...
string concatenation is probably the most valuable.
math with integer, can't think of an application.
conversions between int and string, would it be transparent to user?
As much as possible.
For example, inv-timeout uses int value. In avp_write("16", "s:inv-timeout"), we didn't specify if 16 is a number or not, is it string by default?
yes
Also in the db table, avp type is 0, meaning string value. We haven't encountered any problem.
In your case is no need for conversion, I am thinking to concatenation of a string value with a int value, or converting specific values extracted from headers (eg., Expires) to int for some comparison operations.
Ramona
Thanks, Richard
In your case is no need for conversion, I am thinking to concatenation of a string value with a int value, or converting specific values extracted from headers (eg., Expires) to int for some comparison operations.
If avp_check can be extended for int comparison, that would be great.
Btw, is there a way to check if an avp attribute exists?
Richard
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:25:34 -1000, Richard richard@o-matrix.org wrote:
The functionality will be included in avpops, but I cannot give an exact time line right now. There are a lot of operations that can be performed with avps and I should make a list with priorities, perhaps math operations with integers and string concatenation would be the first. Also, conversions from int to string and vice-versa...
string concatenation is probably the most valuable.
math with integer, can't think of an application.
I can. It would help me out in a project I'm working on right now. I was sitting here starting to modify my copy of avp_db to do a avp_db_increment and avp_db_decrement so that I can monitor call counts (concurrent per user) via avps.
Generic math support would be much better. :-) Waiting, eagerly.
Vitaly:
Your explain is very very clear for me to understand the RPID.
I am tring it on my server, but it seems a little bit problem at my CISCO trunking.
Anyway, it is very useful for me to know what RPID is.
Thank you very much.
Best Regard Charles
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:56:21 -0500, Vitaly Nikolaev vitaly@voipsonic.com wrote:
Sure
RPID is Remote-Party-Id: field in SIP that tell to outgoing GW what value and setting put in CallerID when GW will terminate call to .. whatever
Read this:
Readme for module auth_db Readme for module Auth URL: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122newft/122 t/122t13/ftsipext.htm
May be it not best document, but it will tell you what is rpid and why you need it
In short: You put in ser: modparam("auth", "rpid_prefix", "Name <sip:") modparam("auth", "rpid_suffix", "@sip.frontlineglobal.net;user=phone>;party=calling;screen=yes;privacy=off")
Name can be any, screen=yes means CallerID is trusted, some carried sekip it if see screen=no, privacy=off means who CLI to remote party (on or full - caller id blocking)
This is for kind of static thing, and I did not find way (almost half year ago) to make it dynamic.., per customer, per call
Then u do:
append_rpid_hf(); on INVITE
and then SER will take value that It received from database during authorize and append prefix/suffix and send it in SIP header.
README is quite good, just read it and you will how exact idea how to use it
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On Behalf Of Charles Wang Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:41 PM To: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: [Serusers] Manipulate from_uri
Dear Paul:
I am a new user of SER sip. And would you please tell me an explain about what the RPID is??
I want to control the call to PSTN with B2BUA of vovida or Asterisk.
Best Regard Charles
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:33:26 -0500, Java Rockx javarockx@gmail.com wrote:
Vitaly,
I believe you are correct that RPID is only helpful during SIP->PSTN
calls.
I'm not real familiar with B2BUA, but if I were to introduce one in to my system, does that mean I need to have all the RTP traffic pass through my network as well, or does the B2BUA only deal with SIP messaging?
Regards, Paul
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:14:18 -0500, Vitaly Nikolaev vitaly@voipsonic.com wrote:
The answer is B2BUA
There actually two ways,
First is b2bua which is nice (for me ok.. I like it :)
Second if you assign the CallerID number to device.. the real callerid,
(for
example in my network we use some fake numbers into devices and then
change
it do real callerid (did) in b2bua), then some devices, for example
SIPURA,
can send Anonymous as name in From and Contact and some GWs, will use it
and
hide callerid on outgoing call.
And third:
And there are also Remote-Party-Id: field in SIP that partially
supported by
SER and supported by most of GW and carriers, and that is probably RIGHT
way
to do that.
When PSTN GW sends call to outside of ur network, it no just skip
callerid,
u can do it but it is wrong, it make it private, so usual ppl will not
see
it but for example 911 and some toll free subscriber will see. That
right
way and that how everybody should do cli blocking.
What is wrong in this method is that if you call goes from SIP to SIP
and
you use as me fake CLI on devices, customers will see fake numbers
because
as far as I know SIP devices does not support RPID (please correct me if
I
am wrong) so in my case I will have to use combination of N1 and N3..
-----Original Message----- From: serusers-bounces@iptel.org [mailto:serusers-bounces@lists.iptel.org] On Behalf Of Java Rockx Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:20 AM To: Klaus Darilion Cc: serusers@lists.iptel.org Subject: Re: [Serusers] Manipulate from_uri
Klaus,
I realize that RFC3261 says do not modify the From header, however, my question is this;
When making SIP-to-SIP calls between two subscribers on the same SIP proxy, how can one implement Caller ID Block when RPID is not usually honored by SIP UAs - since this is really for PSTN gateways?
It seems that altering the From header in this case is the only option. Have I missed something?
Regards, Paul
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:00:14 +0100, Klaus Darilion klaus.mailinglists@pernau.at wrote:
Hi Mik!
Do not modify the From: or To: URI - this is not allowed (RFC 3261)
and
will cause problems.
regards, klaus
Mik Cheez wrote:
Since I'm able to modify the URI for relaying, I would assume there would be a way to modify the FROM_URI as well. Has anyone managed
to do
this with SER acting as a proxy? Any other possible avenues to
modify
the CALLID?
Best regards
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
Serusers mailing list serusers@lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
-
Charles Wang -
Elena Ramona Modroiu -
Richard -
Terry Wilson -
Vitaly Nikolaev