Oops,apologize, missed that:

version: kamailio 5.3.3 (x86_64/linux) 44ccb9-dirty flags: USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS, DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC, Q_MALLOC, F_MALLOC, TLSF_MALLOC, DBG_SR_MEMORY, USE_FUTEX, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST, HAVE_RESOLV_RES ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS 1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select. id: 44ccb9 -dirty compiled on 17:04:55 Apr 17 2020 with gcc 4.9.2

Tried this with version 5.0, 5.2, and now 5.3 same situation..

Thankyou for looking into this, Sammy

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 2:33 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda@gmail.com wrote:

Hello,

you have to provide the version of kamailio for each reported kamailio issue, otherwise is hard to match with the source code. Use 'kamailio -v' to get version details.

Cheers, Daniel On 23.04.20 23:36, SamyGo wrote:

Hi,

Is there a way to broadcast KDMQ to the cluster but not expect a reply back !?as far as I've read the source code dmq_bcast_message is exactly like dmq_send_message in a way that it expects a callback to be executed on response i.e expects a reply.

So, the situation I'm facing is I'm broadcasting message to cluster and I do not want a reply back. The following two options result in crash & core dump.

1 - If my script doesn't respond back, by use of dmq_handle_message, it marks the destined servers as "inactive" and stops usrloc sync process which isn't desirable. 2 - If I respond back with the dmq_handle_message it crashes the Kamailio which just received this broadcasted message.

Here is how its done in script:

*broadcasting message to cluster:* dmq_bcast_message("userOnline", "$fu", "text/plain");

*Receiving and handling a broadcast message:* route[DMQ_HANDLE] { if(!(is_method("KDMQ") || $rm == "KDMQ")) return;

if(is_method("KDMQ") || $rm == "KDMQ"){
        if($rU =~ "userOnline"){
                //user came online in cluster, resume transactions

if-any suspended $avp(remoteUser) = $rb; } dmq_handle_message(); exit; } }

*Related log lines:* Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: ALERT: <script>: [da2c1-2f499] ------ DMQ_HANDLE: UserOnline Event Received ------ Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: DEBUG: dmq [message.c:53]: ki_dmq_handle_message_rc(): dmq_handle_message [KDMQ sip:userOnline@9.8.7.123:5060] Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: DEBUG: dmq [message.c:66]: ki_dmq_handle_message_rc(): dmq_handle_message peer found: userOnline Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: DEBUG: <core> [core/receive.c:437]: receive_msg(): request-route executed in: 401461 usec Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[935]: DEBUG: dmq [worker.c:87]: worker_loop(): dmq_worker [2 935] lock acquired and crash/segfault..

Core dump: https://pastebin.com/S7ekCPfF

Any help or pointers to solve this would be really appreciated.

Best Regards, Sammy

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing Listsr-users@lists.kamailio.orghttps://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

Yes, I did read all(past 3+ years) his replies specific to DMQ and DMQ USRLOC and only one matched exact description and there has no resolution to it. Github open+closed issues for DMQ didn't have anything similar either. Could it be something I'm doing wrong !?

Additional info: One of the server is direct on Public IP and Other one is behind NAT. Another test setup where it consistently reproducible is two server behind NAT(AWS) Here are the mod params. Only usrloc sync is done via DMQ and no other module is using DMQ.

listen=udp:LocalIP:5060 advertise PublicIP:5060

modparam("dmq","server_address", DMQ_LOCAL_SERVER) modparam("dmq", "notification_address", DMQ_REMOTE_SERVER) modparam("dmq", "multi_notify", 0) //1 for DNS SRV modparam("dmq", "num_workers", 10) modparam("dmq", "ping_interval", 60)

modparam("dmq_usrloc", "enable", 1) modparam("dmq_usrloc", "sync", 1) modparam("dmq_usrloc", "batch_size", 4000) modparam("dmq_usrloc", "batch_usleep", 1000) modparam("dmq_usrloc", "usrloc_domain", "location")

Where: DMQ_REMOTE_SERVER = sip:PublicIP2:5060

GDB info as requested:

Core was generated by `/usr/local/sbin/kamailio -w /tmp/kamailio -P /var/run/kamailio/kamailio.pid -f'. Program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. #0 0x00007f248c4cef15 in send_reply (msg=0x7f2469f88d40, code=0, reason=0x7ffd775e3ab8) at sl.c:276 276 if(reason->s[reason->len-1]=='\0') { (gdb) (gdb) (gdb) frame 0 #0 0x00007f248c4cef15 in send_reply (msg=0x7f2469f88d40, code=0, reason=0x7ffd775e3ab8) at sl.c:276 276 if(reason->s[reason->len-1]=='\0') { (gdb) p *reason $1 = {s = 0x0, len = 0} (gdb) (gdb) frame 1 #1 0x00007f24656c6549 in worker_loop (id=2) at worker.c:129 129 if(slb.freply(current_job->msg, peer_response.resp_code, (gdb) p *worker $3 = {queue = 0x7f2469f240a8, jobs_processed = 5, lock = {val = 2}, pid = 935} (gdb) (gdb) (gdb) p *current_job $6 = {f = 0x7f24656d6d8d <empty_peer_callback>, msg = 0x7f2469f88d40, orig_peer = 0x7f2469f6ed50, next = 0x0, prev = 0x0} (gdb)

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 1:30 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda@gmail.com wrote:

Hello,

have you tried the suggestion from Charles in the other response? It can help figuring out where the problem resides.

Now, from C point of view, I would need the following output from gdb of the core file:

frame 0 p *reason

frame 1 p *worker p *current_job

I would also need to know the modparams for dmq and other dmq_* module, plus the list if modules for which you enabled dmq (eg, htable, dialog, presence, ...).

Cheers, Daniel On 24.04.20 18:10, SamyGo wrote:

Oops,apologize, missed that:

version: kamailio 5.3.3 (x86_64/linux) 44ccb9-dirty flags: USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS, DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC, Q_MALLOC, F_MALLOC, TLSF_MALLOC, DBG_SR_MEMORY, USE_FUTEX, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST, HAVE_RESOLV_RES ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS 1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select. id: 44ccb9 -dirty compiled on 17:04:55 Apr 17 2020 with gcc 4.9.2

Tried this with version 5.0, 5.2, and now 5.3 same situation..

Thankyou for looking into this, Sammy

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 2:33 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla < miconda@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hello,

you have to provide the version of kamailio for each reported kamailio issue, otherwise is hard to match with the source code. Use 'kamailio -v' to get version details.

Cheers, Daniel On 23.04.20 23:36, SamyGo wrote:

Hi,

Is there a way to broadcast KDMQ to the cluster but not expect a reply back !?as far as I've read the source code dmq_bcast_message is exactly like dmq_send_message in a way that it expects a callback to be executed on response i.e expects a reply.

So, the situation I'm facing is I'm broadcasting message to cluster and I do not want a reply back. The following two options result in crash & core dump.

1 - If my script doesn't respond back, by use of dmq_handle_message, it marks the destined servers as "inactive" and stops usrloc sync process which isn't desirable. 2 - If I respond back with the dmq_handle_message it crashes the Kamailio which just received this broadcasted message.

Here is how its done in script:

*broadcasting message to cluster:* dmq_bcast_message("userOnline", "$fu", "text/plain");

*Receiving and handling a broadcast message:* route[DMQ_HANDLE] { if(!(is_method("KDMQ") || $rm == "KDMQ")) return;

if(is_method("KDMQ") || $rm == "KDMQ"){
        if($rU =~ "userOnline"){
                //user came online in cluster, resume transactions

if-any suspended $avp(remoteUser) = $rb; } dmq_handle_message(); exit; } }

*Related log lines:* Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: ALERT: <script>: [da2c1-2f499] ------ DMQ_HANDLE: UserOnline Event Received ------ Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: DEBUG: dmq [message.c:53]: ki_dmq_handle_message_rc(): dmq_handle_message [KDMQ sip:userOnline@9.8.7.123:5060] Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: DEBUG: dmq [message.c:66]: ki_dmq_handle_message_rc(): dmq_handle_message peer found: userOnline Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: DEBUG: <core> [core/receive.c:437]: receive_msg(): request-route executed in: 401461 usec Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[935]: DEBUG: dmq [worker.c:87]: worker_loop(): dmq_worker [2 935] lock acquired and crash/segfault..

Core dump: https://pastebin.com/S7ekCPfF

Any help or pointers to solve this would be really appreciated.

Best Regards, Sammy

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing Listsr-users@lists.kamailio.orghttps://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

--

Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

Hello,

I pushed two patches to prevent the crash, even the modules is not used as expected in the config.

Charles: can you check and see if both makes sense? The one in worker_loop() function is to prevent the crash:

* https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/a675ab88fefac75145a7d563fee04314...

This should be backported if all goes fine with it.

The second one in empty_peer_callback() is to generated a 202-Accepted response, otherwise in such cases the sender will do retransmissions:

* https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/7f618c2d855ac268df905eb3d6e18733...

But maybe it was on purpose not to send a response (i.e., to allow sending the response from config), in such case it can be reverted.

Cheers, Daniel

On 24.04.20 20:57, Charles Chance wrote:

Hi,

Did you try the config snippet I provided?

Basically dmq_handle_message() must be called if the message is not your own, otherwise the node discovery/health check will not work and you will see nodes disappearing as you described.

Here it is again:

if(is_method("KDMQ")){

if($rU =~ "userOnline"){             //user came online in cluster, resume transactions if-any suspended             $avp(remoteUser) = $rb;             } else {             dmq_handle_message();         }     }

Notice that we check for your own/custom message first, then call handle message if not matched.

Let me know if it works.

Cheers,

Charles

On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 at 19:52, SamyGo <govoiper@gmail.com mailto:govoiper@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes,
I did read all(past 3+ years) his replies specific to DMQ and DMQ
USRLOC and only one matched exact description and there has no
resolution to it. 
Github open+closed issues for DMQ didn't have anything similar
either. Could it be something I'm doing wrong !? 

Additional info:  One of the server is direct on Public IP and
Other one is behind NAT. Another test setup where it consistently
reproducible is two server behind NAT(AWS) 
Here are the mod params.  Only usrloc sync is done via DMQ and no
other module is using DMQ. 

listen=udp:LocalIP:5060 advertise PublicIP:5060

modparam("dmq","server_address", DMQ_LOCAL_SERVER)
modparam("dmq", "notification_address", DMQ_REMOTE_SERVER)
modparam("dmq", "multi_notify", 0) //1 for DNS SRV
modparam("dmq", "num_workers", 10)
modparam("dmq", "ping_interval", 60)

modparam("dmq_usrloc", "enable", 1)
modparam("dmq_usrloc", "sync", 1)
modparam("dmq_usrloc", "batch_size", 4000)
modparam("dmq_usrloc", "batch_usleep", 1000)
modparam("dmq_usrloc", "usrloc_domain", "location")

Where:  DMQ_REMOTE_SERVER  = sip:PublicIP2:5060 

GDB info as requested:

Core was generated by `/usr/local/sbin/kamailio -w /tmp/kamailio
-P /var/run/kamailio/kamailio.pid -f'.
Program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
#0  0x00007f248c4cef15 in send_reply (msg=0x7f2469f88d40, code=0,
reason=0x7ffd775e3ab8) at sl.c:276
276             if(reason->s[reason->len-1]=='\0') {
(gdb)
(gdb)
(gdb) frame 0
#0  0x00007f248c4cef15 in send_reply (msg=0x7f2469f88d40, code=0,
reason=0x7ffd775e3ab8) at sl.c:276
276             if(reason->s[reason->len-1]=='\0') {
(gdb) p *reason
$1 = {s = 0x0, len = 0}
(gdb)
(gdb) frame 1
#1  0x00007f24656c6549 in worker_loop (id=2) at worker.c:129
129                                    
if(slb.freply(current_job->msg, peer_response.resp_code,
(gdb) p *worker
$3 = {queue = 0x7f2469f240a8, jobs_processed = 5, lock = {val =
2}, pid = 935}
(gdb)
(gdb)
(gdb) p *current_job
$6 = {f = 0x7f24656d6d8d <empty_peer_callback>, msg =
0x7f2469f88d40, orig_peer = 0x7f2469f6ed50, next = 0x0, prev = 0x0}
(gdb)


On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 1:30 PM Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<miconda@gmail.com <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>> wrote:

    Hello,

    have you tried the suggestion from Charles in the other
    response? It can help figuring out where the problem resides.

    Now, from C point of view, I would need the following output
    from gdb of the core file:

    frame 0
    p *reason

    frame 1
    p *worker
    p *current_job

    I would also need to know the modparams for dmq and other
    dmq_* module, plus the list if modules for which you enabled
    dmq (eg, htable, dialog, presence, ...).

    Cheers,
    Daniel

    On 24.04.20 18:10, SamyGo wrote:

...

    Oops,apologize, missed that:

    version: kamailio 5.3.3 (x86_64/linux) 44ccb9-dirty
    flags: USE_TCP, USE_TLS, USE_SCTP, TLS_HOOKS, USE_RAW_SOCKS,
    DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC,
    Q_MALLOC, F_MALLOC, TLSF_MALLOC, DBG_SR_MEMORY, USE_FUTEX,
    FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE, USE_DNS_FAILOVER,
    USE_NAPTR, USE_DST_BLACKLIST, HAVE_RESOLV_RES
    ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS 1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144,
    MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535, DEFAULT PKG_SIZE 8MB
    poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
    id: 44ccb9 -dirty
    compiled on 17:04:55 Apr 17 2020 with gcc 4.9.2

    Tried this with version 5.0, 5.2, and now 5.3 same situation.. 

    Thankyou for looking into this,
    Sammy

    On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 2:33 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla
    <miconda@gmail.com <mailto:miconda@gmail.com>> wrote:

        Hello,

        you have to provide the version of kamailio for each
        reported kamailio issue, otherwise is hard to match with
        the source code. Use 'kamailio -v' to get version details.

        Cheers,
        Daniel

        On 23.04.20 23:36, SamyGo wrote:

...

        Hi,

        Is there a way to broadcast KDMQ to the cluster but not
        expect a reply back !?as far as I've read the source
        code dmq_bcast_message is exactly like dmq_send_message
        in a way that it expects a callback to be executed on
        response i.e expects a reply.

        So, the situation I'm facing is I'm broadcasting message
        to cluster and I do not want a reply back. The following
        two options result in crash & core dump.

        1 - If my script doesn't respond back, by use of
        dmq_handle_message, it marks the destined servers as
        "inactive" and stops usrloc sync process which
        isn't desirable.
        2 - If I respond back with the dmq_handle_message it
        crashes the Kamailio which just received this
        broadcasted message.

        Here is how its done in script:

        *broadcasting message to cluster:*
                dmq_bcast_message("userOnline", "$fu",
        "text/plain");

        *Receiving and handling a broadcast message:*
        route[DMQ_HANDLE] {
            if(!(is_method("KDMQ") || $rm == "KDMQ")) return;
           
            if(is_method("KDMQ") || $rm == "KDMQ"){
                    if($rU =~ "userOnline"){
                            //user came online in cluster,
        resume transactions if-any suspended
                            $avp(remoteUser) = $rb;    
                    }
                    dmq_handle_message();
                    exit;
            }
        }

        *Related log lines:*
        Apr 23 21:15:48  kamailio[916]: ALERT: <script>:
        [da2c1-2f499] ------ DMQ_HANDLE: UserOnline Event
        Received ------
        Apr 23 21:15:48  kamailio[916]: DEBUG: dmq
        [message.c:53]: ki_dmq_handle_message_rc():
        dmq_handle_message [KDMQ sip:userOnline@9.8.7.123:5060
        <http://sip:userOnline@9.8.7.123:5060>]
        Apr 23 21:15:48  kamailio[916]: DEBUG: dmq
        [message.c:66]: ki_dmq_handle_message_rc():
        dmq_handle_message peer found: userOnline
        Apr 23 21:15:48  kamailio[916]: DEBUG: <core>
        [core/receive.c:437]: receive_msg(): request-route
        executed in: 401461 usec
        Apr 23 21:15:48  kamailio[935]: DEBUG: dmq
        [worker.c:87]: worker_loop(): dmq_worker [2 935] lock
        acquired
        and crash/segfault..

        Core dump: https://pastebin.com/S7ekCPfF

        Any help or pointers to solve this would be really
        appreciated.

        Best Regards,
        Sammy

        _______________________________________________
        Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
        sr-users@lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>
        https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

        -- 
        Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
        www.twitter.com/miconda <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>

    -- 
    Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
    www.twitter.com/miconda <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>

_______________________________________________
Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
sr-users@lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org>
https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

-- *Charles Chance* Managing Director

t. 0330 120 1200    m. 07932 063 891

Sipcentric Ltd. Company registered in England & Wales no. 7365592. Registered office: Faraday Wharf, Innovation Birmingham Campus, Holt Street, Birmingham Science Park, Birmingham B7 4BB.

I need someone to build a calling card switch for my company for a fee.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020, 2:35 AM Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda@gmail.com wrote:

Hello,

you have to provide the version of kamailio for each reported kamailio issue, otherwise is hard to match with the source code. Use 'kamailio -v' to get version details.

Cheers, Daniel On 23.04.20 23:36, SamyGo wrote:

Hi,

Is there a way to broadcast KDMQ to the cluster but not expect a reply back !?as far as I've read the source code dmq_bcast_message is exactly like dmq_send_message in a way that it expects a callback to be executed on response i.e expects a reply.

So, the situation I'm facing is I'm broadcasting message to cluster and I do not want a reply back. The following two options result in crash & core dump.

1 - If my script doesn't respond back, by use of dmq_handle_message, it marks the destined servers as "inactive" and stops usrloc sync process which isn't desirable. 2 - If I respond back with the dmq_handle_message it crashes the Kamailio which just received this broadcasted message.

Here is how its done in script:

*broadcasting message to cluster:* dmq_bcast_message("userOnline", "$fu", "text/plain");

*Receiving and handling a broadcast message:* route[DMQ_HANDLE] { if(!(is_method("KDMQ") || $rm == "KDMQ")) return;

if(is_method("KDMQ") || $rm == "KDMQ"){
        if($rU =~ "userOnline"){
                //user came online in cluster, resume transactions

if-any suspended $avp(remoteUser) = $rb; } dmq_handle_message(); exit; } }

*Related log lines:* Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: ALERT: <script>: [da2c1-2f499] ------ DMQ_HANDLE: UserOnline Event Received ------ Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: DEBUG: dmq [message.c:53]: ki_dmq_handle_message_rc(): dmq_handle_message [KDMQ sip:userOnline@9.8.7.123:5060] Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: DEBUG: dmq [message.c:66]: ki_dmq_handle_message_rc(): dmq_handle_message peer found: userOnline Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[916]: DEBUG: <core> [core/receive.c:437]: receive_msg(): request-route executed in: 401461 usec Apr 23 21:15:48 kamailio[935]: DEBUG: dmq [worker.c:87]: worker_loop(): dmq_worker [2 935] lock acquired and crash/segfault..

Core dump: https://pastebin.com/S7ekCPfF

Any help or pointers to solve this would be really appreciated.

Best Regards, Sammy

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing Listsr-users@lists.kamailio.orghttps://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

-- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

Am sorry! Thanks for the information.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020, 11:13 PM Alex Balashov abalashov@evaristesys.com wrote:

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 08:25:15PM -0400, kachi communication wrote:

...

I need someone to build a calling card switch for my company for a fee.

1. This has nothing to do with the mailing list thread to which you are

replying, and as such is quite a rude and inconsiderate intrusion;

2. There is a business mailing list specifically for commercial

solicitations of this nature:

https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/business

3. You can find a list of providers of commercial Kamailio consulting

and support here:

https://www.kamailio.org/w/business-directory/

-- Alex

-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC

Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

Update:I've applied the code changes on 5.3 and 5.2 version and I can now see that once DMQ peer gets added the 202 Accepted DMQ started showing up and now cluster pair seems to be stable. No more core dumps or notification_peer deletion messages. So quick thought, what if I broadcast message to > 2 Kamailio boxes and all recipients send back 202 Accepted DMQ back to the sender. wouldn't it cause some trouble to the sender ?

BR, Sammy

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 4:53 PM SamyGo govoiper@gmail.com wrote:

Hi, I've applied the changes to the two files and taken some captures. I'm trying to find out if the 202 Accepted part is engaged or not, so far doesn't seem to show up in the pcaps. However if I put dmq_handle_msg() it goes and send back a 404 User Not Found from the message.c file.

    peer = find_peer(msg->parsed_uri.user);
    if(!peer) {
            LM_DBG("no peer found for %.*s\n",

msg->parsed_uri.user.len, msg->parsed_uri.user.s); if(slb.freply(msg, 404, &dmq_404_rpl) < 0) { LM_ERR("sending reply\n"); goto error; } return returnval; }

Not crashing now atleast. I'm going to keep on trying script combinations and see how to get the *202 Accepted DMQ.*

Thanks, Sammy

On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 7:55 AM kachi communication kachicomm@gmail.com wrote:

...

Am sorry! Thanks for the information.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020, 11:13 PM Alex Balashov abalashov@evaristesys.com wrote:

...

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 08:25:15PM -0400, kachi communication wrote:

...

I need someone to build a calling card switch for my company for a fee.

1. This has nothing to do with the mailing list thread to which you are

replying, and as such is quite a rude and inconsiderate intrusion;

2. There is a business mailing list specifically for commercial

solicitations of this nature:

https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/business

3. You can find a list of providers of commercial Kamailio consulting

and support here:

https://www.kamailio.org/w/business-directory/

-- Alex

-- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC

Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

---

Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users@lists.kamailio.org https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users