[Serusers] problem with MESSAGE and un-REGISTER

Mon Jun 11 06:45:59 CEST 2007

Thank you Michal,
I added fix_rport() in the INIT block, and it fixed the problem of
storing messages as offline. Thanks!!
And yes, I also noticed there's no maddr in the messages, I will try
to recompile SER.

Kumar

On 6/9/07, Michal Matyska <michal at iptel.org> wrote:
> Hi Kumar,
>
> I have finally some time to look at the traces.
>
> 1)user ligaj - you wrote not behind NAT
> check packet #1:
>  Internet Protocol, Src: 192.168.2.5, Dst: 192.168.2.2
>   User Datagram Protocol, Src Port: 1078 (1078), Dst Port: sip (5060)
>    Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.2.5:15538
>
> Port translation done somewhere or broken client.
>
> 2) no problem with user kumar - behind NAT - OK
> packet #5
>  Internet Protocol, Src: 192.168.2.4, Dst: 192.168.2.2
>   User Datagram Protocol, Src Port: 1469 (1469), Dst Port: sip (5060)
>    Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.80.129:14926
>    Contact: <sip:192.168.80.129:14926>;methods="..."
>
> 3) clients seem to work on the address presented in Contact -
> see OPTIONS and 200 OK packets #28-#31
>
> 4) INVITE from Ligaj to Kumar
> starting packet #9
> start is correct, then UAS replies with 488 (really hard to guess why)
> and reply proxied back. Reply received at UAC, acknowledged by ACK BUT
> the UAC retransmitts the INVITE for next 30 seconds. Eventhough it has
> CSeq 2, it does not contain the Proxy-Authorization header, so SER
> replies with 407....
>
> 5) INVITE from Avalanche to Ligaj packets #43-#53
> session x-ms-message estabillished
>
> well typicall MS way
>
> 6) MESSAGE from Avalanche to Ligaj
> the client uses STRICT routing (RFC2543) which does SER is able to
> handle, but is becoming obsoleted especially in 3g networks.
>
> Note that the MESSAGE goes INSIDE of the INVITE dialog (has to tag).
>
> You should add force_rport() somewhere at beginning of your ser script,
> the request came from different ip:port than is listed in Via header,
> the ip was catched into the received parameter, but rport has not, so
> the 200 OK reply is sent to wrong port, thus you see the ICMP port
> unreachable.
>
>
> Michal
>
> P.S. I don't see sny maddr in the messages....
>
>
> On Pá, 2007-06-08 at 10:27 +0545, KUMAR wrote:
> > Michal,
> > It did not work. The MESSAGE sent from the UA behind NAT is being
> > stored as offline messages, and sent a while later, even though the
> > other user is online.
> > I did not have this problem with the old SER. With the old SER, the
> > only problem that I was having was that MESSAGE did not work with TCP,
> > but with UDP, it worked. I have also tried to make changes to the
> > registry as mentioned in the list. But that too did not work. I'm
> > including the packet capture at the server.
> >
> > The user kumar is behind NAT. While the user ligaj is outside NAT.
> >
> > I am using VMWare to simulate user behind NAT, could that cause problems ??
> > I am having no problems at all with Xlite.
> > Thanks
> > kumar
> >
> > On 6/7/07, Michal Matyska <michal at iptel.org> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > yes you did it correctly. In the time I prepared the option, I did not
> > > put it into the flags, as you then have to recompile all the modules
> > > (they are used to match the core-module version).... but anyway if you
> > > compile core, you can compile the modules too... so I'll put it there.
> > >
> > > Did it help?
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't have any obvious clue for the log message no UAC support.
> > >
> > > Michal
> > >
> > > On Ne, 2007-06-03 at 11:58 +0545, KUMAR wrote:
> > > > Thanks Michal,
> > > > I tried to recompile SER with HONOR_MADDR. Can you please tell me how
> > > > do I do it. I changed the Makefile.defs to include -DHONOR_MADDR, and
> > > > compiled, but I'm not sure if the option is actually included. Here's
> > > > what i get when I do a ser -V
> > > > version: ser 2.0.0-rc1 (i386/linux)
> > > >
> > > > flags: STATS: Off, USE_IPV6, USE_TCP, USE_TLS, TLS_HOOKS,
> > > > DISABLE_NAGLE, USE_MCAST, DNS_IP_HACK, SHM_MEM, SHM_MMAP, PKG_MALLOC,
> > > > DBG_QM_MALLOC, FAST_LOCK-ADAPTIVE_WAIT, USE_DNS_CACHE,
> > > > USE_DNS_FAILOVER, USE_DST_BLACKLIST
> > > > ADAPTIVE_WAIT_LOOPS=1024, MAX_RECV_BUFFER_SIZE 262144, MAX_LISTEN 16,
> > > > MAX_URI_SIZE 1024, BUF_SIZE 65535
> > > > poll method support: poll, epoll_lt, epoll_et, sigio_rt, select.
> > > > @(#) $Id: main.c,v 1.228.2.2 2007/03/01 13:53:37 andrei Exp $
> > > >
> > > > As you can see, there's no HONOR_MADDR, though it showed up while
> > > > compiling. I have attached the Makefile.defs that I've used. Do I need
> > > > to do something else to compile with this option? Also, what I failed
> > > > to mention last time is that when I log on using M$ client, I get the
> > > > message
> > > >
> > > > Warning: run_failure_handlers: no UAC support (0, 0)
> > > >
> > > > Can you please tell me what is this supposed to mean?
> > > > Thank you
> > > > Kumar
> > > >
> > > > On 5/31/07, Michal Matyska <michal at iptel.org> wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > the M$ messenger is know to misuse maddr parameter in the uri. You can
> > > > > check your message if it does contain maddr and then try compile ser
> > > > > with HONOR_MADDR option. It should work; if not attach network capture
> > > > > of the sip traffic.
> > > > >
> > > > > Michal
> > > > >
> > > > > On Čt, 2007-05-31 at 11:32 +0545, KUMAR wrote:
> > > > > > hi all,
> > > > > > I've started using SER 2.0 rc1 and am having a bit of problems with UA
> > > > > > behind NAT. I'm using Windows Messenger 5.1 as the UA. Everything
> > > > > > works fine when both UAs are not behind NAT.  But when I place one of
> > > > > > the UAs behind NAT, then, here's what happens, in this order
> > > > > >
> > > > > > UA Behind Nat ----------MESSAGE------>UA outside NAT..............ok
> > > > > > UA outside NAT-----------MESSAGE------->UA behind NAT.............OK
> > > > > > UA behind NAT------------MESSAGE------->UA outside
> > > > > > NAT.............message is stored by msilo module and sent after some
> > > > > > time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The log shows:  MSILO: the downstream UA doesn't support MESSAGEs
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Notice that this only happens once a message from outside of NAT is
> > > > > > sent to UA inside NAT. I am using RTP Proxy for NAT solution which is
> > > > > > on the same system as SER.
> > > > > > Moreover, I also cannot signout using the Windows Messenger.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, when I tested using XLite, None of the above mentioned
> > > > > > problems arose. Can anyone please suggest me as to where the problem
> > > > > > might be.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The ser.cfg that I'm using is the one from the iptel site, the one
> > > > > > with NAT & RTPproxy. I am also attaching the ser.cfg.
> > > > > > Thank you in advance.
> > > > > > Kumar
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Serusers mailing list
> > > > > > Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> > > > > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Serusers mailing list
> > > > Serusers at lists.iptel.org
> > > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> > >
> > >
>
>