[SR-Users] topos module - possible bug
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
miconda at gmail.com
Fri Apr 28 11:57:44 CEST 2017
There seems to be an issue saving the record-route list for b-side in
topos_d table -- first two are saved but then there are only 0
characters instead of the rest of record routes:
'<sip:192.168.252.75;r2=on;lr=on;ftag=A1;did=072.87c;rtpi=1;nat=no;rtpi=1>\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0'
I will have to dig a bit into the code.
Cheers, Daniel
On 27.04.17 14:30, Pete Kelly wrote:
> Yes no problem. I wanted to come but the life schedule would not allow
> it this time.
>
>
> On 27 April 2017 at 13:11, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com
> <mailto:miconda at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> time, I need more time :-) ... with Kamailio World Conference
> around the corner, I am caught in a lot of admin tasks...
>
> Daniel
>
>
> On 27.04.17 13:11, Pete Kelly wrote:
>> Hi Daniel
>>
>> Is there anything else you need on this?
>>
>> On 26 April 2017 at 15:06, Pete Kelly <pkelly at gmail.com
>> <mailto:pkelly at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Daniel
>>
>> It's CSeq 1, fromtag A1
>>
>> DB attached
>>
>> On 26 April 2017 at 15:03, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>> <miconda at gmail.com <mailto:miconda at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Can you paste here the from tag or cseq for the dialog
>> you are referring to? Because the number of frames are
>> not matching my pcap viewer.
>>
>> Send also the db dump, they should reveal if something is
>> broken there.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>> On 26.04.17 14:46, Pete Kelly wrote:
>>> Ah I see why it is confusing
>>>
>>> This setup maintains a Call-ID through an SBC
>>> downstream, so the INVITE's you see have the same
>>> Call-ID but they have a different fromtag/cseq,
>>> Wireshark shows them all as one call which is annoying
>>> when looking at the viewer!
>>>
>>> If you check the first call only between 252.70 and
>>> 252.75 you will see INVITE (frame 4), 200OK (frame 16)
>>> with lots of RR headers.
>>>
>>> The ACK generated by topos (frame 21) only contains 1
>>> Route header, it should contain more so the request can
>>> hop through the proxy chain as shown in frame 16.
>>>
>>> I see the example from Sergey is working, but there is
>>> only 1 RR header in this example - as you can see from
>>> my example the topos module uses the first RR header but
>>> ignores the other 5.
>>>
>>> I have the DB dump and logfiles from this call too if
>>> useful.
>>>
>>> Pete
>>>
>>>
>>> On 26 April 2017 at 12:41, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>>> <miconda at gmail.com <mailto:miconda at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> As I could notice upon a quick look, there seems to
>>> be two calls -- two
>>> INVITE requests having same call id but different
>>> cseq. Can you confirm
>>> this is the case? Because the capture doesn't seem
>>> to have all the
>>> incoming/outgoing messages, some are missing.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> On 26.04.17 12:59, Sergey Basov wrote:
>>> > You give to us very hard callflow...
>>> >
>>> > Without any pauses between responces..
>>> >
>>> > Some requests go through 127.0.0.1... But
>>> responces from 127.0.0.1 not present.
>>> >
>>> > There are peers from which invites not present in
>>> dump. I can not see
>>> > ful path of the initial Invite, but there is
>>> responses.
>>> >
>>> > I will send dump in next email directly.
>>> > --
>>> > Best regards,
>>> > Sergey Basov e-mail:
>>> sergey.v.basov at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:sergey.v.basov at gmail.com>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 2017-04-26 11:01 GMT+03:00 Pete Kelly
>>> <pkelly at gmail.com <mailto:pkelly at gmail.com>>:
>>> >> Attached is the pcap from latest nightly.
>>> >>
>>> >> As you can see (frame 21) the ACK is incorrect, I
>>> believe it should specify
>>> >> all the hops from the 200OK (frame 16) so that
>>> the hop by hop ACK can be
>>> >> routed via the proxy chain.
>>> >>
>>> >> topoh module works fine.
>>> >>
>>> >> Pete
>>> >>
>>> >> On 26 April 2017 at 05:18, Sergey Basov
>>> <sergey.v.basov at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:sergey.v.basov at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >>> I dont know how nightly builds are done.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Just try with latest 5.0.1 nightly and send new
>>> dump.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> As I understud topos module done to remove
>>> record-route headers to hide
>>> >>> topology... Am I wright, Daniel?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> And try to disable topos module and enable topoh
>>> module. Will it all work
>>> >>> as you expecrs?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> WBR
>>> >>> Sergey Basov
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 25 апр. 2017 г. 11:31 PM пользователь "Pete
>>> Kelly" <pkelly at gmail.com <mailto:pkelly at gmail.com>>
>>> >>> написал:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> I have tried with 5.0.1 from today (25th April).
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Are you saying build for 26th will have some fixes?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 25 April 2017 at 18:59, Sergey Basov
>>> <sergey.v.basov at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:sergey.v.basov at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >>>>> Actualy latest fixes to 180/183/200, ACK and
>>> memory leak was pushed to
>>> >>>>> 5.0 and master branch.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> So, please try with latest 5.0.1 nightly.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> --
>>> >>>>> WBR
>>> >>>>> Sergey Basov
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> 25 апр. 2017 г. 8:55 PM пользователь "Pete
>>> Kelly" <pkelly at gmail.com <mailto:pkelly at gmail.com>>
>>> >>>>> написал:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Call is with sipp but first goes through
>>> another SBC to clean up the
>>> >>>>>> SIP (in case of problems with sipp via
>>> headers etc).
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> The traces I've done are actually with 4.4.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Will they be OK or would you prefer 5.0.1?
>>> The problem is exactly the
>>> >>>>>> same on both.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On 25 April 2017 at 16:25, Sergey Basov
>>> <sergey.v.basov at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:sergey.v.basov at gmail.com>>
>>> >>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> Hi.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Can you send dump of the call with kamailio
>>> 5.0.1 nightly?
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> And does you make call using sipp?
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>> WBR
>>> >>>>>>> Sergey Basov
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> 25 апр. 2017 г. 5:57 PM пользователь "Pete
>>> Kelly" <pkelly at gmail.com <mailto:pkelly at gmail.com>>
>>> >>>>>>> написал:
>>> >>>>>>>> Looks like from last night:
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> 5.0.1+0~20170425013247.36+trusty
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> On 25 April 2017 at 15:42,
>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>>> >>>>>>>> <miconda at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:miconda at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> to be sure, it is 5.0.1 build from last
>>> night or quite recent? There
>>> >>>>>>>>> were some fixes in the past days to topos
>>> module.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>> >>>>>>>>> Daniel
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> On 25.04.17 15:59, Pete Kelly wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Daniel
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Sorry for the delayed response to this,
>>> the ACK is for a 200OK yes
>>> >>>>>>>>> and the problem still persists in latest
>>> 4.4 and the 5.0.1 nightly build.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> I have all DB entries/kam logs/pcap files.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> If you check the attached pcap,
>>> 192.168.70.70 and 192.168.252.70 are
>>> >>>>>>>>> the same instance of Kamailio, it is being
>>> used to bridge the 2 networks.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Frame 34 shows the 200OK with lots of
>>> Record-Route etc, and frame 35
>>> >>>>>>>>> shows topos in action.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> However the ACK that is relayed in Frame
>>> 38 seems to be missing all
>>> >>>>>>>>> the Route information that was supplied in
>>> the 200OK, this causes the ACK to
>>> >>>>>>>>> be relayed directly to the Contact,
>>> breaking the proxy chain.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Pete
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> On 22 February 2017 at 18:31,
>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>>> >>>>>>>>> <miconda at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:miconda at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> is the ACK for 200ok? Or an ack for a
>>> negative response?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Can you get a pcap for such situation
>>> with all messages related to
>>> >>>>>>>>>> the call?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Daniel
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 22/02/2017 17:20, Pete Kelly wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> I am using the topos module when bridging
>>> 2 networks with Kamailio.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> The INVITE/200OK part of the transaction
>>> is working fine (i.e. the
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Contact on both sides matches correctly
>>> the corresponding network).
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> However when the ACK is sent into
>>> Kamailio, instead of realising
>>> >>>>>>>>>> the next hop is myself and skipping it,
>>> Kamailio is sending the ACK directly
>>> >>>>>>>>>> to itself as a packet, causing the call
>>> setup to break.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Does anyone have any advice for this
>>> situation?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>>>>>>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio
>>> (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing
>>> >>>>>>>>>> list
>>> >>>>>>>>>> sr-users at lists.sip-router.org
>>> <mailto:sr-users at lists.sip-router.org>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>> <http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>>> >>>>>>>>>> www.twitter.com/miconda
>>> <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> --
>>> www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Kamailio Advanced Training - Mar 6-8
>>> (Europe) and Mar 20-22 (USA) -
>>> >>>>>>>>>> www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10,
>>> 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
>>> <http://www.kamailioworld.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>> --
>>> >>>>>>>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>>> >>>>>>>>> www.twitter.com/miconda
>>> <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> --
>>> www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Kamailio Advanced Training - May 22-24
>>> (USA) - www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017
>>> - www.kamailioworld.com <http://www.kamailioworld.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>>>>>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
>>> >>>>>>>> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
>>> <mailto:sr-users at lists.kamailio.org>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>>> <https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>>> www.twitter.com/miconda
>>> <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> --
>>> www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>
>>> Kamailio Advanced Training - May 22-24 (USA) -
>>> www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
>>> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 -
>>> www.kamailioworld.com <http://www.kamailioworld.com>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
>> www.twitter.com/miconda <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>
>> Kamailio Advanced Training - May 22-24 (USA) - www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
>> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com <http://www.kamailioworld.com>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla
> www.twitter.com/miconda <http://www.twitter.com/miconda> -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda <http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda>
> Kamailio Advanced Training - May 22-24 (USA) - www.asipto.com <http://www.asipto.com>
> Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com <http://www.kamailioworld.com>
>
>
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
Kamailio Advanced Training - May 22-24 (USA) - www.asipto.com
Kamailio World Conference - May 8-10, 2017 - www.kamailioworld.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20170428/f4b10591/attachment.html>
More information about the sr-users
mailing list