[Users] ATA 188 problem ?

Daniel-Constantin Mierla daniel at voice-system.ro
Wed Feb 1 10:19:26 CET 2006


On 01/31/06 23:18, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> Hi Medve,
>
> I would say the BYE is badly formatted:
>  
> U 2006/01/30 23:28:05.692840 NATBOX:5555 -> OPENSER:6060
> BYE sip:imedve3 at XLITE SIP/2.0.
> Route: <sip:7741 at OPENSER:6060;nat=yes;ftag=1123414629;lr=on>.
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.101:5555;branch=z9hG4bKce5c531019c8eec7.
> From: sip:7741 at sip2;tag=1700830800.
> To: imedve3 <sip:imedve3 at sip2>;tag=1123414629.
> Call-ID: A412855F-F4E3-470E-AC30-F047AE517CA1 at XLITE.
> CSeq: 1 BYE.
> User-Agent: Cisco ATA 188  v3.2.0 atasip (041111A).
> Content-Length: 0.
>
> the FROM hdr is broken - the uri needs to be enclosed between brackets 
> since the tag is a hdr param and not an URI param. The proper format 
> would be:
>
>     From: <sip:7741 at sip2>;tag=1700830800.
According to RFC, the From header is correctly formated, if the uri in 
the header is not enclosed in brackets, then the parameters are 
considered to be header parameters.

In my opinion the problem is that the Xlite puts a different From header 
value in the 200OK. In the BYE, the from is:

From: sip:7741 at sip2;tag=1700830800.

and in 200OK is:

From: <sip:7741 at sip2;tag=1700830800>;tag=1700830800.

I guess that the cisco ata does string comparison of header bodies to 
match the dialog, instead of the tag value.

Cheers,
Daniel

>
>
> regards,
> bogdan
>
>
> Medve Istvan wrote:
>
>> Hi List,
>>
>> I have similar problem what you can read at
>> http://mail.iptel.org/pipermail/serusers/2004-June/008798.html
>>
>> In my test lab I use openser 1.0.0 with mediaproxy. UAC A is an X-Lite
>> with public IP. UAC B is a Cisco ATA 188 behind a natbox. Usernames are
>> not numericals but I use alias table to resolve username based on CLI.
>> Everything works fine expect one situation.
>>
>> When X-Lite calls Cisco ATA and call terminated by calee side with BYE,
>> Cisco ATA does not recognize X-lite's 200 OK response and resends BYE
>> message some times.
>>
>> ATA 188 reports the folowing to syslog:
>>
>> Jan 30 22:33:29 a 00:02:23 192.168.1.101 [08]:Tags do not match
>> <134>00:02:23 192.168.1.101 [08]:Failed to extract UID from RxMsg
>>
>> If I replace ATA188 with an ATCOM phone, this sutiation works well.
>>
>> So the problem is probably with Cisco ATA 188 but I am not sure that 
>> is it
>> a real problem or Cisco ATA more sensitive for protocol violation than
>> others or there is a missconfiguratin in nat traversal.
>>
>> You can find SIP message capture at http://fuhur.euroweb.hu/ata.txt
>>
>> If you have any ideal please let me know.
>>
>> Regards,
>> imedve
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at openser.org
>> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>  
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at openser.org
> http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>




More information about the sr-users mailing list