14 Jul
2015
14 Jul
'15
10:09 a.m.
Hi all,
I have the following scenario:
U1 (caller) ---> P1 (192.168.0.245, kamailio 4.3, loose-router) ----> P2
----> (192.168.0.101, strict router) ----> .... ----> U2 (called)
When U2 answers the call, at P1 arrives the 200 OK with:
Record-Route:
<sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on>
The problem is that the ACK from U1 is forwarded from kamailio to P2, as
if P2 is a loose router. P2 drops the ACK message.
From kamailio logs I see:
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:88]:
is_preloaded(): is_preloaded: No
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:783]:
after_loose(): Topmost route URI: 'sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on' is me
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:869]:
after_loose(): URI to be processed:
'sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-289ce'
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:878]:
after_loose(): Next URI is a loose router
Why after_loose function considers the next URI a loose router? The
Route HF in the ACK with the URI of the next hop does not contain ;lr .
It seems that the function is_strict fails detecting the strict router.
Thanks.
Regards.
Antonio
14 Jul
14 Jul
10:25 a.m.
Sorry,
here's the Route HF present in the ACK received from U1:
Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Regards.
Antonio
Il 14/07/2015 12:09, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
Hi all,
I have the following scenario:
U1 (caller) ---> P1 (192.168.0.245, kamailio 4.3, loose-router) ---->
P2 ----> (192.168.0.101, strict router) ----> .... ----> U2 (called)
When U2 answers the call, at P1 arrives the 200 OK with:
Record-Route:
<sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on>
The problem is that the ACK from U1 is forwarded from kamailio to P2,
as if P2 is a loose router. P2 drops the ACK message.
From kamailio logs I see:
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:88]:
is_preloaded(): is_preloaded: No
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:783]:
after_loose(): Topmost route URI: 'sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on' is me
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:869]:
after_loose(): URI to be processed:
'sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-289ce'
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:878]:
after_loose(): Next URI is a loose router
Why after_loose function considers the next URI a loose router? The
Route HF in the ACK with the URI of the next hop does not contain ;lr .
It seems that the function is_strict fails detecting the strict router.
Thanks.
Regards.
Antonio
10:28 a.m.
Hello,
what is the request URI? It might be better to just paste here the full
ACK message.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 14/07/15 12:25, Antonio Reale wrote:
Sorry,
here's the Route HF present in the ACK received from U1:
Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Regards.
Antonio
Il 14/07/2015 12:09, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Book: SIP Routing With Kamailio - http://www.asipto.com
Hi all,
I have the following scenario:
U1 (caller) ---> P1 (192.168.0.245, kamailio 4.3, loose-router) ---->
P2 ----> (192.168.0.101, strict router) ----> .... ----> U2 (called)
When U2 answers the call, at P1 arrives the 200 OK with:
Record-Route:
<sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on>
The problem is that the ACK from U1 is forwarded from kamailio to P2,
as if P2 is a loose router. P2 drops the ACK message.
From kamailio logs I see:
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:88]:
is_preloaded(): is_preloaded: No
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
[loose.c:783]: after_loose(): Topmost route URI:
'sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on' is me
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
[loose.c:869]: after_loose(): URI to be processed:
'sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-289ce'
Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
[loose.c:878]: after_loose(): Next URI is a loose router
Why after_loose function considers the next URI a loose router? The
Route HF in the ACK with the URI of the next hop does not contain ;lr .
It seems that the function is_strict fails detecting the strict router.
Thanks.
Regards.
Antonio
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
11:02 a.m.
Hi Daniel,
this is the ACK received on Kamailio:
#
U 172.26.130.235:44435 -> 192.168.0.245:5060
ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
Max-Forwards: 70
Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
CSeq: 2 ACK
Proxy-Authorization: Digest
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
Content-Length: 0
and this the ACK forwarded by Kamailio to P2
#
U 192.168.0.245:5060 -> 192.168.0.101:5060
ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
192.168.0.245;branch=z9hG4bKa252.cc67d8b538d8ad5c01c3e75d472653ec.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
Max-Forwards: 69
Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
CSeq: 2 ACK
Proxy-Authorization: Digest
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
Content-Length: 0
Kamailio considers P2 a loose router so the R-URI is not changed.
Thanks.
Regards.
Antonio
Il 14/07/2015 12:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla ha scritto:
Hello,
what is the request URI? It might be better to just paste here the full
ACK message.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 14/07/15 12:25, Antonio Reale wrote:
> Sorry,
> here's the Route HF present in the ACK received from U1:
>
> Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
> Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>
> Regards.
>
> Antonio
>
>
>
> Il 14/07/2015 12:09, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
>> Hi all,
>> I have the following scenario:
>> U1 (caller) ---> P1 (192.168.0.245, kamailio 4.3, loose-router) ---->
>> P2 ----> (192.168.0.101, strict router) ----> .... ----> U2 (called)
>>
>> When U2 answers the call, at P1 arrives the 200 OK with:
>> Record-Route:
>> <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on>
>>
>> The problem is that the ACK from U1 is forwarded from kamailio to P2,
>> as if P2 is a loose router. P2 drops the ACK message.
>>
>> From kamailio logs I see:
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:88]:
>> is_preloaded(): is_preloaded: No
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>> [loose.c:783]: after_loose(): Topmost route URI:
>> 'sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on' is me
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>> [loose.c:869]: after_loose(): URI to be processed:
>> 'sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-289ce'
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>> [loose.c:878]: after_loose(): Next URI is a loose router
>>
>> Why after_loose function considers the next URI a loose router? The
>> Route HF in the ACK with the URI of the next hop does not contain ;lr .
>> It seems that the function is_strict fails detecting the strict router.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> Antonio
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
20 Jul
20 Jul
9:20 a.m.
Hi Daniel,
did you see something strange in the ACK message or you confirm that the
RR module is not behaving correctly?
Thanks.
Regards.
Antonio
Il 14/07/2015 13:02, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
Hi Daniel,
this is the ACK received on Kamailio:
#
U 172.26.130.235:44435 -> 192.168.0.245:5060
ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp
SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
Max-Forwards: 70
Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
CSeq: 2 ACK
Proxy-Authorization: Digest
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
Content-Length: 0
and this the ACK forwarded by Kamailio to P2
#
U 192.168.0.245:5060 -> 192.168.0.101:5060
ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp
SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
192.168.0.245;branch=z9hG4bKa252.cc67d8b538d8ad5c01c3e75d472653ec.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
Max-Forwards: 69
Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
CSeq: 2 ACK
Proxy-Authorization: Digest
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
Content-Length: 0
Kamailio considers P2 a loose router so the R-URI is not changed.
Thanks.
Regards.
Antonio
Il 14/07/2015 12:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla ha scritto:
Hello,
what is the request URI? It might be better to just paste here the full
ACK message.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 14/07/15 12:25, Antonio Reale wrote:
> Sorry,
> here's the Route HF present in the ACK received from U1:
>
> Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
> Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>
> Regards.
>
> Antonio
>
>
>
> Il 14/07/2015 12:09, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
>> Hi all,
>> I have the following scenario:
>> U1 (caller) ---> P1 (192.168.0.245, kamailio 4.3, loose-router) ---->
>> P2 ----> (192.168.0.101, strict router) ----> .... ----> U2 (called)
>>
>> When U2 answers the call, at P1 arrives the 200 OK with:
>> Record-Route:
>> <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on>
>>
>> The problem is that the ACK from U1 is forwarded from kamailio to P2,
>> as if P2 is a loose router. P2 drops the ACK message.
>>
>> From kamailio logs I see:
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:88]:
>> is_preloaded(): is_preloaded: No
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>> [loose.c:783]: after_loose(): Topmost route URI:
>> 'sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on' is me
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>> [loose.c:869]: after_loose(): URI to be processed:
>> 'sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-289ce'
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>> [loose.c:878]: after_loose(): Next URI is a loose router
>>
>> Why after_loose function considers the next URI a loose router? The
>> Route HF in the ACK with the URI of the next hop does not contain
>> ;lr .
>> It seems that the function is_strict fails detecting the strict
>> router.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> Antonio
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
4:02 p.m.
Hello,
I didn't have time to look at it so far -- quite some traveling lately.
At a quick look, seems that the next hop is not detected as strict
router, I have to look at the code.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 20/07/15 11:20, Antonio Reale wrote:
Hi Daniel,
did you see something strange in the ACK message or you confirm that
the RR module is not behaving correctly?
Thanks.
Regards.
Antonio
Il 14/07/2015 13:02, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Book: SIP Routing With Kamailio - http://www.asipto.com
Hi Daniel,
this is the ACK received on Kamailio:
#
U 172.26.130.235:44435 -> 192.168.0.245:5060
ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp
SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
Max-Forwards: 70
Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
CSeq: 2 ACK
Proxy-Authorization: Digest
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
Content-Length: 0
and this the ACK forwarded by Kamailio to P2
#
U 192.168.0.245:5060 -> 192.168.0.101:5060
ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp
SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
192.168.0.245;branch=z9hG4bKa252.cc67d8b538d8ad5c01c3e75d472653ec.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
Max-Forwards: 69
Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
CSeq: 2 ACK
Proxy-Authorization: Digest
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
Content-Length: 0
Kamailio considers P2 a loose router so the R-URI is not changed.
Thanks.
Regards.
Antonio
Il 14/07/2015 12:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla ha scritto:
Hello,
what is the request URI? It might be better to just paste here the full
ACK message.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 14/07/15 12:25, Antonio Reale wrote:
> Sorry,
> here's the Route HF present in the ACK received from U1:
>
> Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
> Route:
> <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>
> Regards.
>
> Antonio
>
>
>
> Il 14/07/2015 12:09, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
>> Hi all,
>> I have the following scenario:
>> U1 (caller) ---> P1 (192.168.0.245, kamailio 4.3, loose-router) ---->
>> P2 ----> (192.168.0.101, strict router) ----> .... ----> U2 (called)
>>
>> When U2 answers the call, at P1 arrives the 200 OK with:
>> Record-Route:
>> <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on>
>>
>> The problem is that the ACK from U1 is forwarded from kamailio to P2,
>> as if P2 is a loose router. P2 drops the ACK message.
>>
>> From kamailio logs I see:
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:88]:
>> is_preloaded(): is_preloaded: No
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>> [loose.c:783]: after_loose(): Topmost route URI:
>> 'sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on' is me
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>> [loose.c:869]: after_loose(): URI to be processed:
>> 'sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-289ce'
>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>> [loose.c:878]: after_loose(): Next URI is a loose router
>>
>> Why after_loose function considers the next URI a loose router? The
>> Route HF in the ACK with the URI of the next hop does not contain
>> ;lr .
>> It seems that the function is_strict fails detecting the strict
>> router.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> Antonio
>
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
> list
> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
4:21 p.m.
Hi Daniel,
no problem.
Thank you very much for the support.
Regards.
Antonio
Il 20/07/2015 18:02, Daniel-Constantin Mierla ha scritto:
Hello,
I didn't have time to look at it so far -- quite some traveling lately.
At a quick look, seems that the next hop is not detected as strict
router, I have to look at the code.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 20/07/15 11:20, Antonio Reale wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> did you see something strange in the ACK message or you confirm that
> the RR module is not behaving correctly?
>
> Thanks.
> Regards.
>
> Antonio
>
>
> Il 14/07/2015 13:02, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> this is the ACK received on Kamailio:
>>
>> #
>> U 172.26.130.235:44435 -> 192.168.0.245:5060
>> ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp
>> SIP/2.0
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
>> Max-Forwards: 70
>> Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
>> Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>> Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
>> To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
>> From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
>> Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
>> CSeq: 2 ACK
>> Proxy-Authorization: Digest
>>
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
>> User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
>> Content-Length: 0
>>
>> and this the ACK forwarded by Kamailio to P2
>>
>> #
>> U 192.168.0.245:5060 -> 192.168.0.101:5060
>> ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp
>> SIP/2.0
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 192.168.0.245;branch=z9hG4bKa252.cc67d8b538d8ad5c01c3e75d472653ec.0
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
>> Max-Forwards: 69
>> Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>> Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
>> To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
>> From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
>> Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
>> CSeq: 2 ACK
>> Proxy-Authorization: Digest
>>
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
>> User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
>> Content-Length: 0
>>
>>
>> Kamailio considers P2 a loose router so the R-URI is not changed.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Regards.
>>
>> Antonio
>>
>>
>> Il 14/07/2015 12:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla ha scritto:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> what is the request URI? It might be better to just paste here the full
>>> ACK message.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> On 14/07/15 12:25, Antonio Reale wrote:
>>>> Sorry,
>>>> here's the Route HF present in the ACK received from U1:
>>>>
>>>> Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
>>>> Route:
>>>> <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>>
>>>> Antonio
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Il 14/07/2015 12:09, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> I have the following scenario:
>>>>> U1 (caller) ---> P1 (192.168.0.245, kamailio 4.3, loose-router)
---->
>>>>> P2 ----> (192.168.0.101, strict router) ----> .... ----> U2
(called)
>>>>>
>>>>> When U2 answers the call, at P1 arrives the 200 OK with:
>>>>> Record-Route:
>>>>>
<sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>>>>> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on>
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that the ACK from U1 is forwarded from kamailio to
P2,
>>>>> as if P2 is a loose router. P2 drops the ACK message.
>>>>>
>>>>> From kamailio logs I see:
>>>>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
[loose.c:88]:
>>>>> is_preloaded(): is_preloaded: No
>>>>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>>>>> [loose.c:783]: after_loose(): Topmost route URI:
>>>>> 'sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on' is me
>>>>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>>>>> [loose.c:869]: after_loose(): URI to be processed:
>>>>>
'sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-289ce'
>>>>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>>>>> [loose.c:878]: after_loose(): Next URI is a loose router
>>>>>
>>>>> Why after_loose function considers the next URI a loose router? The
>>>>> Route HF in the ACK with the URI of the next hop does not contain
>>>>> ;lr .
>>>>> It seems that the function is_strict fails detecting the strict
>>>>> router.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Antonio
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
>>>> list
>>>> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
>>>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
28 Jul
28 Jul
9:56 a.m.
New subject: [SOLVED] RR module - Fail detecting strict routing
Reported the issue on GH:
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/issues/267
Successfully tested the patch pushed by miconda in commit 0c42a84:
https://github.com/kamailio/kamailio/commit/0c42a848258d475f57ea25458bc75e5…
Thanks Daniel.
Regards.
Antonio
Il 20/07/2015 18:21, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
Hi Daniel,
no problem.
Thank you very much for the support.
Regards.
Antonio
Il 20/07/2015 18:02, Daniel-Constantin Mierla ha scritto:
Hello,
I didn't have time to look at it so far -- quite some traveling lately.
At a quick look, seems that the next hop is not detected as strict
router, I have to look at the code.
Cheers,
Daniel
On 20/07/15 11:20, Antonio Reale wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> did you see something strange in the ACK message or you confirm that
> the RR module is not behaving correctly?
>
> Thanks.
> Regards.
>
> Antonio
>
>
> Il 14/07/2015 13:02, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> this is the ACK received on Kamailio:
>>
>> #
>> U 172.26.130.235:44435 -> 192.168.0.245:5060
>> ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp
>> SIP/2.0
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
>>
>> Max-Forwards: 70
>> Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
>> Route:
>> <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>> Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
>> To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
>> From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
>> Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
>> CSeq: 2 ACK
>> Proxy-Authorization: Digest
>>
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
>>
>> User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
>> Content-Length: 0
>>
>> and this the ACK forwarded by Kamailio to P2
>>
>> #
>> U 192.168.0.245:5060 -> 192.168.0.101:5060
>> ACK sip:7240F8EF-55A4D642000CBC22-8A135700@172.16.0.21;transport=udp
>> SIP/2.0
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 192.168.0.245;branch=z9hG4bKa252.cc67d8b538d8ad5c01c3e75d472653ec.0
>> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 172.26.130.235:44435;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1cd3a01fa9171649-1---d8754z-
>>
>> Max-Forwards: 69
>> Route:
>> <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>> Contact: <sip:0000000010@172.26.130.235:44435;transport=UDP>
>> To: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=516145211
>> From: <sip:0000000010@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP>;tag=a56ac352
>> Call-ID: NGU5YmUzMGYwM2RmMzc0YTQyNDRmZWZlOWJmMTA0ZjY.
>> CSeq: 2 ACK
>> Proxy-Authorization: Digest
>>
username="0000000010",realm="192.168.0.245",nonce="VaTXblWk1kKUxIMJBdWbpRBBCP850QVR",uri="sip:0000000011@192.168.0.245;transport=UDP",response="1daf03c97b8a12e0154d463f543e5592",algorithm=MD5
>>
>> User-Agent: Z 3.6.25251 r25476
>> Content-Length: 0
>>
>>
>> Kamailio considers P2 a loose router so the R-URI is not changed.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Regards.
>>
>> Antonio
>>
>>
>> Il 14/07/2015 12:28, Daniel-Constantin Mierla ha scritto:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> what is the request URI? It might be better to just paste here the
>>> full
>>> ACK message.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> On 14/07/15 12:25, Antonio Reale wrote:
>>>> Sorry,
>>>> here's the Route HF present in the ACK received from U1:
>>>>
>>>> Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr>
>>>> Route:
>>>> <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>>
>>>> Antonio
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Il 14/07/2015 12:09, Antonio Reale ha scritto:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> I have the following scenario:
>>>>> U1 (caller) ---> P1 (192.168.0.245, kamailio 4.3, loose-router)
>>>>> ---->
>>>>> P2 ----> (192.168.0.101, strict router) ----> .... ----> U2
>>>>> (called)
>>>>>
>>>>> When U2 answers the call, at P1 arrives the 200 OK with:
>>>>> Record-Route:
>>>>>
<sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e>
>>>>> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on>
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that the ACK from U1 is forwarded from kamailio
>>>>> to P2,
>>>>> as if P2 is a loose router. P2 drops the ACK message.
>>>>>
>>>>> From kamailio logs I see:
>>>>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>>>>> [loose.c:88]:
>>>>> is_preloaded(): is_preloaded: No
>>>>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>>>>> [loose.c:783]: after_loose(): Topmost route URI:
>>>>> 'sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on' is me
>>>>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>>>>> [loose.c:869]: after_loose(): URI to be processed:
>>>>>
'sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-289ce'
>>>>> Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr
>>>>> [loose.c:878]: after_loose(): Next URI is a loose router
>>>>>
>>>>> Why after_loose function considers the next URI a loose router? The
>>>>> Route HF in the ACK with the URI of the next hop does not contain
>>>>> ;lr .
>>>>> It seems that the function is_strict fails detecting the strict
>>>>> router.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Antonio
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
>>>> list
>>>> sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
>>>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
3214
days inactive
3228
days old
7 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Antonio Reale -
Daniel-Constantin Mierla