[Kamailio-Users] Users Digest, Vol 57, Issue 85

Daniel-Constantin Mierla miconda at gmail.com
Sun Mar 7 23:08:45 CET 2010 

Done!

If you would have read the info you included in the email, 
unsubscription could have been done by yourself.

Cheers,
Daniel

On 03/06/2010 06:10 AM, Zhe wrote:
> Help. Please remove me from this mail list. Thanks<br><br>在2010-02-27 19:00:01，users-request at lists.kamailio.org 写道：
>    
>> Send Users mailing list submissions to
>> 	users at lists.kamailio.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> 	http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> 	users-request at lists.kamailio.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> 	users-owner at lists.kamailio.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Users digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. remove parameter (Elgar Onel)
>>    2. Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy doesn't	work
>>       (I?aki Baz Castillo)
>>    3. Re: Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy doesn't work
>>       (Daniel-Constantin Mierla)
>>    4. Re: Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy	doesn't work
>>       (I?aki Baz Castillo)
>>    5. Re: Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy	doesn't work
>>       (Daniel-Constantin Mierla)
>>    6. Re: Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy	doesn't work
>>       (I?aki Baz Castillo)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 03:00:25 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Elgar Onel<elgaronel at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: [Kamailio-Users] remove parameter
>> To: users at lists.kamailio.org
>> Message-ID:<444271.31134.qm at web114207.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Dear friends,
>>
>> how to remove parameters from INVITE sip address?
>>
>> tia, e.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:<http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100226/bb3d7c60/attachment.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:08:36 +0100
>> From: I?aki Baz Castillo<ibc at aliax.net>
>> Subject: [Kamailio-Users] Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy
>> 	doesn't	work
>> To: users at lists.kamailio.org
>> Message-ID:<201002261408.36778.ibc at aliax.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi, I've a problem with an Alcatel PBX in the way it performs transference:
>>
>> - Alcatel (behind NAT) sends INVITE to 111 and Kamailio forces RtpProxy. Let's
>> assume the selected UDP port for RtpProxy is 1000.
>>
>> - Alcatel sends INVITE to 222 and Kamailio forces RtpProxy. Let's assume the
>> selected UDP port for RtpProxy is 2000.
>>
>> Then Alcatel performs the transference as follows:
>>
>> - It sends a re-INVITE for 111 to Kamailio by setting the SDP to the IP or
>> RtpProxy and port 2000.
>>
>> - It also sends a re-INVITE for 222 to Kamailio by setting the SDP to the IP
>> or RtpProxy and port 1000.
>>
>> This is, Alcatel wants that the provider (me) sends the RTP to itself, while
>> mantaining the original SIP dialogs established (so it's ok at signalling
>> level, but at RTP level it cannot work as RtpProxy shoud send RTP to itself).
>>
>> I'm thinking on how to solve it but find no solution. Any suggestion?
>> Thanks.
>>
>> -- 
>> I?aki Baz Castillo<ibc at aliax.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:04:36 +0100
>> From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla<miconda at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy
>> 	doesn't work
>> To: I?aki Baz Castillo<ibc at aliax.net>
>> Cc: users at lists.kamailio.org
>> Message-ID:<4B87D4F4.9090400 at gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 02/26/2010 02:08 PM, I?aki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>      
>>> Hi, I've a problem with an Alcatel PBX in the way it performs transference:
>>>
>>> - Alcatel (behind NAT) sends INVITE to 111 and Kamailio forces RtpProxy. Let's
>>> assume the selected UDP port for RtpProxy is 1000.
>>>
>>> - Alcatel sends INVITE to 222 and Kamailio forces RtpProxy. Let's assume the
>>> selected UDP port for RtpProxy is 2000.
>>>
>>> Then Alcatel performs the transference as follows:
>>>
>>> - It sends a re-INVITE for 111 to Kamailio by setting the SDP to the IP or
>>> RtpProxy and port 2000.
>>>
>>> - It also sends a re-INVITE for 222 to Kamailio by setting the SDP to the IP
>>> or RtpProxy and port 1000.
>>>
>>> This is, Alcatel wants that the provider (me) sends the RTP to itself, while
>>> mantaining the original SIP dialogs established (so it's ok at signalling
>>> level, but at RTP level it cannot work as RtpProxy shoud send RTP to itself).
>>>
>>> I'm thinking on how to solve it but find no solution. Any suggestion?
>>>        
>> Do you re-engage rtpproxy for re-INVITEs? Also, have you played with
>> force rtp proxy flags to trust public addresses?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel
>>
>> -- 
>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>> Kamailio SIP Router Masterclass, Berlin, March 22-26, 2010
>> * http://www.asipto.com/index.php/sip-router-masterclass/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:09:08 +0100
>> From: I?aki Baz Castillo<ibc at aliax.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy
>> 	doesn't work
>> To: users at lists.kamailio.org
>> Message-ID:<201002261509.08939.ibc at aliax.net>
>> Content-Type: Text/Plain;  charset="utf-8"
>>
>> El Viernes, 26 de Febrero de 2010, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribi?:
>>
>>      
>>> Do you re-engage rtpproxy for re-INVITEs?
>>>        
>> Yes, the client is behind NAT so I must use RtpProxy for initial INVITE.
>> Then, if I don't re-engage rtpproxy for re-INVITE RtpProxy would receive RTP
>> in already working ports but from a different source, so RtpProxy would
>> reject/ignore such RTP traffic.
>>
>>
>>      
>>> Also, have you played with
>>> force rtp proxy flags to trust public addresses?
>>>        
>> But that wouldn't solve the problem, am I wrong?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> -- 
>> I?aki Baz Castillo<ibc at aliax.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:39:41 +0100
>> From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla<miconda at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy
>> 	doesn't work
>> To: I?aki Baz Castillo<ibc at aliax.net>
>> Cc: users at lists.kamailio.org
>> Message-ID:<4B88075D.3080100 at gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>>
>>
>>
>> On 02/26/2010 03:09 PM, I?aki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>      
>>> El Viernes, 26 de Febrero de 2010, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribi?:
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>>>> Do you re-engage rtpproxy for re-INVITEs?
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> Yes, the client is behind NAT so I must use RtpProxy for initial INVITE.
>>> Then, if I don't re-engage rtpproxy for re-INVITE RtpProxy would receive RTP
>>> in already working ports but from a different source, so RtpProxy would
>>> reject/ignore such RTP traffic.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>>>> Also, have you played with
>>>> force rtp proxy flags to trust public addresses?
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> But that wouldn't solve the problem, am I wrong?
>>>
>>>        
>> there is a deadlock when chaining two rtpproxy. In learning mode
>> rtpproxy waits for the other side to send first packet to know the ip
>> and port. iirc it is r flag to avoid this.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel
>>
>> -- 
>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>> Kamailio SIP Router Masterclass, Berlin, March 22-26, 2010
>> * http://www.asipto.com/index.php/sip-router-masterclass/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 6
>> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:07:48 +0100
>> From: I?aki Baz Castillo<ibc at aliax.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Kamailio-Users] Exotic case (but real) in which RtpProxy
>> 	doesn't work
>> To: users at lists.kamailio.org
>> Message-ID:<201002261907.49119.ibc at aliax.net>
>> Content-Type: Text/Plain;  charset="utf-8"
>>
>> El Viernes, 26 de Febrero de 2010, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribi?:
>>      
>>> On 02/26/2010 03:09 PM, I?aki Baz Castillo wrote:
>>>        
>>>> El Viernes, 26 de Febrero de 2010, Daniel-Constantin Mierla escribi?:
>>>>          
>>>>> Do you re-engage rtpproxy for re-INVITEs?
>>>>>            
>>>> Yes, the client is behind NAT so I must use RtpProxy for initial INVITE.
>>>> Then, if I don't re-engage rtpproxy for re-INVITE RtpProxy would receive
>>>> RTP in already working ports but from a different source, so RtpProxy
>>>> would reject/ignore such RTP traffic.
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>>> Also, have you played with
>>>>> force rtp proxy flags to trust public addresses?
>>>>>            
>>>> But that wouldn't solve the problem, am I wrong?
>>>>          
>>> there is a deadlock when chaining two rtpproxy. In learning mode
>>> rtpproxy waits for the other side to send first packet to know the ip
>>> and port. iirc it is r flag to avoid this.
>>>        
>> Interesting, I'll try it and will comment the result.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> I?aki Baz Castillo<ibc at aliax.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.kamailio.org
>> http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>> End of Users Digest, Vol 57, Issue 85
>> *************************************
>>      
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (OpenSER) - Users mailing list
> Users at lists.kamailio.org
> http://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
> http://lists.openser-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
Kamailio SIP Router Masterclass, Berlin, March 22-26, 2010
* http://www.asipto.com/index.php/sip-router-masterclass/

More information about the sr-users mailing list