[SR-Users] Question about processing of packet

Klaus Darilion klaus.mailinglists at pernau.at
Sun Apr 15 22:04:51 CEST 2012

Maybe there is special handling for Contact header, because IIRC, 
fix_nated_contact() before save() also works.


On 13.04.2012 03:18, Fabian Borot wrote:
> Txs a lot Reda, I will try it
> Although I made a couple of test w/o it and so far it looks like the
> modified message is used on the next processing , not the original one
> but I will keep testing
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: fborot at hotmail.com
> To: users at lists.kamailio.org
> Subject: Question about processing of packet
> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:45:44 -0400
> greetings,
> I have a customer that is sending the REGISTER with 2 ports in the
> Contact header:
> Contact: <sip:44435661000448181 at 201.xxx.xxx.xxx:19778:5060>
> After some troubleshooting we found that the wireless router is the one
> inserting the 2nd port. It is not the SIP UA itself.
> Is it possible to "sanitize" the REGISTER at the beginning of the
> configuration logic with the TEXTOPS module so that we can leave one
> port and then process the REGISTER
> with the typical:
> if (!www_authorize("$fd", "subscriber"))
> {...}
> Or will this only applies to messages that are proxied/forwarded
> (example: received malformed INVITE, before calling route[1] to send it
> to the destination sanitize it with the TEXTOPS functions)
> I guess my question is: after removing the extra port at the begining,
> when I call the "if (!www_authorize("$fd", "subscriber"))",
> will it process the modified version or the original one?
> txs a lot
> fborot
> _______________________________________________
> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

More information about the sr-users mailing list