[Serusers] PA error sending notifies

[samuel]

If you are using XCAP authentication for MESSAGEs, there's a function
called authorize_message that needs to have as parameter the file name
of the IM ruleset.
For user sam, in xcap-root/im-rules/users/sam/im-rules.xml there are
the rules for this function. The XML file is similar to the
presence-rules but has important differences (correct me if I'm wrong,
Vaclav!!!):
*it only has a blacklist parameter (no whitelist!!)
*the namespace is different (so be carefull in copy&paste from the
presence-rules!!!) and, as Vaclav poitned out "proprietary" from
iptel.


About the structure I have: x86 debian testing. Libraries versions I
don't know exactly but the ones in the testing repository EXCEPT a
library which I had to get for serweb from the stable version...but
it's not affecting SER part.

Samuel.
2006/5/16, İlker Aktuna   (Koç. net  ) <ilkera at koc.net>:
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> What did  you mean by following:
>
> >Instead of
> >>
> >> if (authorize_message("http://localhost/xcap")) {
> >
> >there should be
> >
> >if (authorize_message("im-rules.xml")){
>
> Btw, did you receive my email with following questions :
>
> >> I have the same problem with notification and other presence messages
> with you.
> >> Can you tell me which Linux distribution you are using Ser on ?
> >> Also please include version numbers for libraries that are required by
> Ser.
> >>
> >> I am trying to find similarities between yours and my ser server.
>
> Regards,
> ilker
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: serusers-bounces at iptel.org
> [mailto:serusers-bounces at iptel.org] On Behalf Of samuel
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 7:13 PM
> To: Vaclav Kubart
> Cc: serusers at iptel.org
> Subject: Re: [Serusers] PA error sending notifies
>
> Let's see if I can finish the e-mail before gmail decides it's enough...:P
>
> 006/5/15, samuel <samu60 at gmail.com>:
> > Following with the handbook...
>
> >
> > the authorize message in the sample confgi files has as parameter the
> > xcap root while it should have the xml file containing the auth.rules.
>
>
> Instead of
>
> >
> > if (authorize_message("http://localhost/xcap")) {
>
> there should be
>
> if (authorize_message("im-rules.xml")){
>
> >
> >
> >
> > 2006/5/15, samuel <samu60 at gmail.com>:
> > > First of all, I have to thank you for the time you spent writing the
> > > handbook, it's really really helpfull....I wish all SER related
> > > parts had this docs..
> > >
> > > I'll try to get familiar with the code of the notifications and I'll
> > > try to find something....which I don't thing so :P. I'll also merge
> > > the two functionalities (proxy + presence) in a unique config file
> > > to see if it works.
> > > I hope I can provide more info these following days.
> > >
> > > About the missing things in the presence handbook, probably the most
> > > important is the new xcap module because in the sample config files
> > > it's missing.
> > > Another thing is that in the XCAP structure description, the
> > > im-rules directory is missing, which might lead to
> > > misunderstandings. I downloaded the structure from the iptel's ftp
> > > and inside the im-rules there were several files corresponding to
> > > presence-rules which should be either removed or updated with the
> > > im-rules namespaces and removing the whitelist.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Samuel.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2006/5/15, Vaclav Kubart <vaclav.kubart at iptel.org>:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > this problem I'm trying to solve with Ilker Aktuna. I try to
> > > > simulate it on my machine and let you know. Or if you solve it, please
> let me know.
> > > > :-)
> > > >
> > > > Please, could you tell me, what things you were missing in
> > > > presence handbook? I'm trying to do it as useful as possible and
> > > > whatever ideas are welcome...
> > > >
> > > >         Vaclav
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 01:38:02PM +0200, samuel wrote:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I recently had a few hours and start installing the presence
> > > > > staff and I have to say that I have it amost workign thanks to
> > > > > the presence handbook, the mailing list and, obviously, a little
> > > > > bit of code review..:P
> > > > >
> > > > > I have two SER instances, the "proxy" and the "presence server"
> > > > > (both with last CVS code) co-located in the same host and I have
> > > > > an issue when the "presence server" tries to send the NOTIFY
> > > > > requests. Below there's an attched log showing the problem (on
> > > > > IP a.b.c.d I've got the two instances):
> > > > >
> > > > > 3(30682) DEBUG notify.c:378: sending winfo notify
> > > > > 3(30682) DEBUG notify.c:383: winfo document created
> > > > > 3(30682) DEBUG notify.c:391: creating headers
> > > > > 3(30682) DEBUG notify.c:398: headers created
> > > > > 3(30682) DEBUG:tm:t_uac:
> > > > >
> next_hop=<sip:a.b.c.d;transport=tcp;ftag=c77b3f33;lr=on>
> > > > > 3(30682) t_uac: no socket found
> > > > > 3(30682) DEBUG notify.c:402: request sent with result -7
> > > > > 3(30682) ERROR: notify.c:404: Can't send watcherinfo
> > > > > notification (-7)
> > > > >
> > > > > This problem appears in other places, not only in the
> > > > > notifications for winfo so probably there's somthing in the
> > > > > selection of the outgoing socket directing to the local IP.
> > > > >
> > > > > >From the proxy part I just ust t_forward_nonack for the "SIMPLE"
> > > > > messages with record route....maybe adding the port in the
> > > > > record route should help?
>
>
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> Bu e-posta mesaji kisiye ozel olup, gizli bilgiler iceriyor olabilir. Eger
> bu e-posta mesaji size yanlislikla ulasmissa,  icerigini hic bir sekilde
> kullanmayiniz ve ekli dosyalari acmayiniz. Bu durumda lutfen e-posta
> mesajini kullaniciya hemen geri gonderiniz  ve  tum kopyalarini mesaj
> kutunuzdan siliniz. Bu e-posta mesaji, hic bir sekilde, herhangi bir amac
> icin cogaltilamaz, yayinlanamaz ve para karsiligi satilamaz.  Bu e-posta
> mesaji viruslere karsi anti-virus sistemleri tarafindan taranmistir. Ancak
> yollayici, bu e-posta mesajinin - virus koruma sistemleri ile kontrol
> ediliyor olsa bile - virus icermedigini garanti etmez ve meydana gelebilecek
> zararlardan dogacak hicbir sorumlulugu kabul etmez.
> This message is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
> whom it is addressed , and may contain confidential  information. If you are
> not the intended recipient of this message or you receive this mail in
> error, you should refrain from making any use of the contents and from
> opening any attachment. In that case, please notify the sender immediately
> and return the message to the sender, then, delete and destroy all copies.
> This e-mail message, can not be copied, published or sold for any reason.
> This e-mail message has been swept by anti-virus systems for the presence of
> computer viruses. In doing so, however,  sender  cannot warrant that virus
> or other forms of data corruption may not be present and do not take any
> responsibility in any occurrence.
> _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>