MessageTo me, the registration looks ok (fix_nated_register will not change contact as
this is not allowed according to the RFC, but the received parameter is there).
However, it looks like the record is not found by lookup("location"). I have a
suspicion that maybe is_uri_host_local() does not match and ser tries to relay directly to
route 1. You should make sure that all ips and domains that you want your ser to handle
can be found in the domain table. Refer to the document for how.
g-)
----- Original Message -----
From: Olivier Taylor
To: 'Greger V. Teigre' ; serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 03:35 PM
Subject: RE : [Serusers] mediaproxy and private ip
here is the result for a call from the pstn to our server :(
same issue for internal calls
U 213.246.57.33:5060 -> 82.146.123.252:5060
INVITE sip:3227470340@82.146.123.252 SIP/2.0..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
213.246.57.33:5060;branch=z9hG4bK4c3acd89..From: "495283361"
<sip:495283361@213.246.57.33>;tag=as3cefb611..To
: <sip:3227470340@82.146.123.252>..Contact:
<sip:495283361@213.246.57.33>..Call-ID:
0a209c9b6676915e710b6f1415ab882f@213.246.57.33..CSeq: 102 INVITE..User-Agent: Voxbone Ca
llcontrol..Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 13:27:12 GMT..Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS,
BYE, REFER..Content-Type: application/sdp..Content-Length: 268....v=0..o=root 10009 100
09 IN IP4 213.246.57.33..s=session..c=IN IP4 213.246.57.33..t=0 0..m=audio 19414
RTP/AVP 18 8 0 101..a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000..a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000..a=rtpmap:0
PCMU/8000..a=rt
pmap:101 telephone-event/8000..a=fmtp:101 0-16..a=silenceSupp:off - - - -..
#
U 82.146.123.252:5060 -> 213.246.57.33:5060
SIP/2.0 479 We don't forward to private IP addresses..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
213.246.57.33:5060;branch=z9hG4bK4c3acd89..From: "495283361"
<sip:495283361@213.246.57.33>;tag=as3cef
b611..To:
<sip:3227470340@82.146.123.252>;tag=59f1565d6938a98ef3fc4707bf9b43aa.d7ae..Call-ID:
0a209c9b6676915e710b6f1415ab882f@213.246.57.33..CSeq: 102 INVITE..Server: Sip
EXpress router (0.9.4 (i386/freebsd))..Content-Length: 0..Warning: 392
82.146.123.252:5060 "Noisy feedback tells: pid=22903 req_src_ip=213.246.57.33
req_src_port=5060 in_u
ri=sip:3227470340@82.146.123.252 out_uri=sip:3227470340@192.168.2.100:5060
via_cnt==1"....
#
Serctl gives private adresses also
~~~Contact(0x284db960)~~~
domain : 'location'
aor : '3227470340'
Contact : 'sip:3227470340@192.168.2.101:6937'
Expires : 2939
q :
Call-ID : '8a6ef9438a7e3642'
CSeq : 2
User-Agent: 'eyeBeam release 3007n stamp 17816'
received : 'sip:81.247.160.151:6937'
State : CS_SYNC
Flags : 1
next : 0x284de468
prev : 0x284db3b0
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Greger V. Teigre [mailto:greger@teigre.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 6 octobre 2005 14:39
À : Olivier Taylor; serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Objet : Re: [Serusers] mediaproxy and private ip
:-) Thanks, now I understand. See inline.
ok,
Thanks for answering ;)
I will reformulate
Using ser.cfg from
onsip.org version 5.
When Uas register to ser, they are register with their privates IPs
(192.168.xxx.xxx), not with the public Ip of the natted network.
So serctl ul show will show the private address for the UA? If so, for some reason
the client_nat_test does not detect the NATed client, an ngrep of the registration will
help.
Making a call requires proxy authentification but ser WWW-Challenge never arrives to
UA(wrong adress).
Register works, even with authentification.
The challenge is not sent to the registered address, but rather to the originator of
the request. An ngrep trace of the INVITE will again help. The challenge response will
normally be sent to the source ip and port, not the contact (which BTW also should be
fixed by calling fix_nated_contact())
g-)
Any idea
In tha cfg, I have :
if (method=="INVITE" && client_nat_test("7")) {
# INSERT YOUR IP ADDRESS HERE
record_route_preset("82.146.xxx.xxx:5060;nat=yes");
} else if (method!="REGISTER") {
record_route();
};
and also :
if (!search("^Contact:[ ]*\*") && client_nat_test("7"))
{
setflag(6);
fix_nated_register();
force_rport();
};
if (!www_authorize("finalcut.be","subscriber")) {
www_challenge("finalcut.be","0");
break;
};
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Greger V. Teigre [mailto:greger@teigre.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 6 octobre 2005 14:10
À : Olivier Taylor; serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Objet : Re: [Serusers] mediaproxy and private ip
Olivier,
You complained about no one answering your questions. An advise: When writing a
question, please state clearly what you want to accomplish, what the problem is, and as
much information about the problem as possible.
I have rechecked some of your recent posts, they are all in telegraph language,
and I find it very hard to understand what your question really is.
To be honest, the below question really makes no sense to me.
g-)
----- Original Message -----
From: Olivier Taylor
To: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 01:44 PM
Subject: [Serusers] mediaproxy and private ip
Using the last cfg from
onsip.org, i just see that now Uas are registered with
their private Ip when using mediaproxy.
Mediaproxy seems the best solution for scalability, that's why I want to
test it.
Any Idea?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers