For your relatively narrow, specific applications in your topology, no. You'd be
better off installing SEMS per se.
-- Alex
--
Sent from my Samsung mobile, and thus lacking in the refinement one might expect from a
proper keyboard.
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
235 E Ponce de Leon Ave
Suite 106
Decatur, GA 30030
Tel: +1-678-954-0670
Web:
http://www.evaristesys.com/phillman25 <phillman25(a)gmail.com> wrote:Hello Alex
Will try with SEMS first, found something called sip:provider CE v2.4
from
http://www.sipwise.com/news/announcements/spce-v2_4-release/ if i'm not mistaken,
this seems to combine Kamailio with SEMS? Do you think that this might be an easier
installation rather than installing SEMS on its own as it seems to provide more
documentation?
Thanks again!
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Alex Balashov <abalashov(a)evaristesys.com> wrote:
The short answer to your latter question is: yes. Cisco media and PSTN gateways have never
hairpinned SIP-to-SIP calls well, even when officially supported.
Asterisk has a lower learning curve due to the abundance of information and tutorials, but
SEMS would make more sense, since all you need is a signaling B2BUA.
-- Alex
--
Sent from my Samsung mobile, and thus lacking in the refinement one might expect from a
proper keyboard.
Alex Balashov - Principal
Evariste Systems LLC
235 E Ponce de Leon Ave
Suite 106
Decatur, GA 30030
Tel: +1-678-954-0670
Web:
http://www.evaristesys.com/
phillman25 <phillman25(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Alex
Thanks for your prompt reply.
The PGW 2200 solution is used as our core PSTN gateway where its currently handling many
SS7, H.323 and SIP interconnections. However, there are a few scenarios like the example
described below, that the call is originating from Kamailio being sent to the PGW and then
back to Kamailio for termination and this scenario doesn't seem to work.
Do you think that by implementing SEMS or Asterisk in between the PGW and Kamailio could
resolve this issue for these specific scenarios?
From your experience what do you think would be a better solution?
Thanks again!
Phillip
========================
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 04:26:28 -0400
From: Alex Balashov <abalashov(a)evaristesys.com>
Subject: Re: [SR-Users] B2BUA issues
To: sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
Message-ID: <501F7FB4.8040700(a)evaristesys.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
What is the larger objective? Are you using the PGW purely as a B2BUA?
If so, that's a colossally overblown waste of resources; just use
something like SEMS or Asterisk.
On 08/06/2012 04:24 AM, phillman25 wrote:
Dear List
I am trying to accomplish the following:
Asterisk PABX (192.168.10.189) ==> Kamailio(xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx) ==> Cisco
PGW 2200 (PSTN gateway) (yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy) ==>
Kamailio(xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx) ==> Asterisk PABX (192.168.10.189)
When trying the above scenario, the call is silent and drops after a few
seconds. In syslog i observe the following error:
*ERROR: <core> [parser/parse_rr.c:84]: parse_rr(): Error while parsing
name-addr (sip:22030305@192.168.10.189:5060
<http://sip:22030305@192.168.10.189:5060>>)*
Looking at the sip trace i see that his might be caused by the ACK
message received from the ASTERISK PABX? :
ACK sip:22030305@192.168.10.189:5060
<http://sip:22030305@192.168.10.189:5060> SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.10.189:5060;branch=z9hG4bK3c80f516;rport
Route:
<sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;lr=on;ftag=as166b1eea;did=97b.66623da5>,<sip:22030305@
yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy;pgw-call=call-55bc4>,<sip:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;lr=on;ftag=as166b1eea>
Max-Forwards: 70
From: "22498045" <sip:22498045@192.168.10.189
<mailto:sip%3A22498045@192.168.10.189>>;tag=as166b1eea
To: <sip:22030305@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx>;tag=as6d578713
Contact: <sip:22498045@192.168.10.189:5060
<http://sip:22498045@192.168.10.189:5060>>
Call-ID: 5e2d61160bd1bec9214e2d7d04e5a778@192.168.10.189:5060
<http://5e2d61160bd1bec9214e2d7d04e5a778@192.168.10.189:5060>
CSeq: 102 ACK
User-Agent: FPBX-2.8.1(1.8.12.0)
Content-Length: 0
After contacting Cisco they informed us that issue is cause by B2BUA
from our current version of Cisco PGW 2200 that doesn't support this
feature. Is there a module, solution that i can implement on Kamailio
that could temporarily resolve this issue?
Thanking you in advance.
Phillip