[SR-Users] Kamailio with CGNAT

Tue Aug 28 21:39:00 CEST 2018

Hello Carsten :)
Thanks for your reply

Actually, we remove the alias from sip massages for a reason, which was  a
bug in the client generating wrong ip in the alias in BYE msgs in Video
Calls only, and even before removing the alias part this problem existed.

under this specific kind of networks, INVITE msg reaches the client, but
the co-responding RINGING msg and msgs follows from the client not reaching
the P-CSCF at all
for that reason we suspect of a NAT problem.

other networks working Fine without the alias

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 2:47 PM Carsten Bock <carsten at ng-voice.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> it's seems not related to CGNAT, but more due to a misconfiguration on
> the Proxy-CSCF. It should evaluate the "alias" in the R-URI in order
> to send it to the proper address.
>
> Thanks,
> Carsten
> --
>
> Carsten Bock
> CEO (Geschäftsführer)
>
> ng-voice GmbH
> Millerntorplatz 1
> 20359 Hamburg / Germany
>
> http://www.ng-voice.com
> mailto:carsten at ng-voice.com
>
> Office +49 40 5247593-40
> Fax +49 40 5247593-99
>
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
> Registergericht: Amtsgericht Hamburg, HRB 120189
> Geschäftsführer: Carsten Bock
> Ust-ID: DE279344284
>
> Hier finden Sie unsere handelsrechtlichen Pflichtangaben:
> http://www.ng-voice.com/imprint/
>
> Am Di., 28. Aug. 2018 um 13:19 Uhr schrieb Amar Tinawi <
> amar.tinawi at gmail.com>:
> >
> > Hi Joel
> >
> > the Via's and Record routes is due to IMS structure, but it doesn't
> affect the concept as i test it with a normal sip Proxy
> >
> > Proxy IP : 94.252.181.93 : 5050
> > RTP Engine : 94.252.181.49
> > I-cscf : 10.192.129.134
> > s-cscf :10.192.129.134
> >
> > Actually i'm using what Mr Carsten introduce for IMS
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 8:33 PM Joel Serrano <joel at textplus.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Amar,
> >>
> >> I had a quick look and I see a lot of via/route headers, I will look
> >> properly later today, can you give me some details on what IP is what
> >> in those traces for when I check them later?
> >>
> >> Also, are you using a kamailio config based on vanilla config
> >> (specially regarding NAT handling and Contact/SDP updates/rewrites)?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 11:39 PM, Amar Tinawi <amar.tinawi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > it's Kamailio for signaling with RTPengine for media (also the RTP
> engine
> >> > has public IP)
> >> >
> >> > any call to reach the user behind the CGNAT will fail because of the
> 200 OK
> >> > msg not reaching the Proxy somehow (i checked, the massage is
> generated in
> >> > the client)
> >> > and any call initiated by the CGNAT client succeeded
> >> >
> >> > would you please check the attached
> >> > many thanks
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 6:00 AM Joel Serrano <joel at textplus.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> It would definitely be useful to see sip traces of the different
> scenarios
> >> >> to try and find what the problem is.
> >> >>
> >> >> Can you give some details of what your setup looks like? Is kamailio
> >> >> acting as a signaling proxy only or is it also handling RTP with
> >> >> rtpengine/rtpproxy?
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 13:30 Amar Tinawi <amar.tinawi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks Joel For reply
> >> >>>
> >> >>> when any user (Not Nated or behind Normal NAT)  is trying to reach a
> >> >>> client behind CGNAT, the INVITE delivered and the client is start to
> >> >>> ringing, but when answering, the answer is not delivered to the
> proxy, so
> >> >>> not delivered to the calling client result to the call started in
> the
> >> >>> CGNATED client and still in establishing in the calling one.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The call is established successfully when the CGNATED send the
> INVITE to
> >> >>> Not Nated client and two way audio.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> CGNATED to CGNATED not working as well .
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 7:57 PM Joel Serrano <joel at textplus.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Also, if the client is not behind CGNAT do you get the Ringing from
> >> >>>> called party?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Is called party the same in both cases?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 09:54 Joel Serrano <joel at textplus.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Can you send the INVITE that proxy sends to called party?
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 02:05 Amar Tinawi <amar.tinawi at gmail.com>
> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Hello
> >> >>>>>> Although my question it's not related to Kamailio directly, but i
> >> >>>>>> think someone could help in this strange behavior
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> in our tests, we have some clients under private networks, where
> the
> >> >>>>>> provider of those networks implements CGNAT (NAT444) for it's
> customers to
> >> >>>>>> reach internet
> >> >>>>>> (Client Private IP) --->(Home router: Private to Private
> NAT)--->(FW
> >> >>>>>> with CGNAT)---------------------------->(Kamailio Proxy Public
> IP)
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Registration is performing fine, but making calls from this
> client had
> >> >>>>>> strange problem as follow:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Client -------------INVITE--------------> Proxy
> >> >>>>>> Proxy -------------Trying---------------->Client
> >> >>>>>> Proxy--------------INVITE---------> Called Party
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> The called party should send Ringing msg, but the massage get
> lost
> >> >>>>>> somewhere and didn't reach to the Proxy. Although all the IP's
> in sip
> >> >>>>>> massages are public
> >> >>>>>> i tried with STUN/TURN and NAThelper module solutions, but
> didn't help
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> is there any way to slove CGNAT with SIP in Kamailio?
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Thanks in Advance
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>>>>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> >> >>>>>> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> >> >>>>>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> >> >>>> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> >> >>>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> >> >>> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> >> >>> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
> >> >>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> >> >> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> >> >> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> >> > sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> >> > https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
> >> >
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> >> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> >> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> > sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> > https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List
> sr-users at lists.kamailio.org
> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kamailio.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20180828/d846a47e/attachment.html>