[Kamailio-Users] Call Stateful Server

[Henning Westerholt]

On Wednesday 18 February 2009, Juan Asencio wrote:
> Carrierroute is assigning the correct host address. So I guess that works,
> but I'm worried about the invite, that is send with ip address of the
> kamailio, instead of the one assigned by carrierroute.
>
> Do you think the address would change if it could find host address
> assigned by cr?

Hi Juan,

>> U 2009/02/18 12:40:51.606688 192.168.50.118:8236 -> 192.168.50.93:5060
>>   INVITE sip:456789 at 192.168.50.93 SIP/2.0..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
>> 192.168.50.118:8236;
>>
>> U 2009/02/18 12:40:51.611241 192.168.50.93:5060 -> 192.168.50.118:8236
>>   SIP/2.0 100 Giving a try..Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.50.118:8236;
>>
>> U 2009/02/18 12:40:51.612321 192.168.50.93:5060 -> 192.158.50.114:5060
>>   INVITE sip:456789 at 192.168.50.93 SIP/2.0..Record-Route:

.118 is the address of your test box, .114 the kamailio and .93 the gateway? 
Yes, cr should rewrite the request uri to the one in its table. I just tested 
with a non existing host name on my system (test.box):

Feb 18 13:26:30 ca ../kamailio[2430]: INFO:carrierroute:cr_do_route: uri 
49721123456787 was rewritten to sip:49721123456787 at test.box:7000, carrier 0, 
domain 10
Feb 18 13:26:30 ca ../kamailio[2430]: CRITICAL:core:mk_proxy: could not 
resolve hostname: "test.box"
Feb 18 13:26:30 ca ../kamailio[2430]: ERROR:tm:uri2proxy: bad host name in URI 
<sip:49721123456787 at test.box:7000>
Feb 18 13:26:30 ca ../kamailio[2430]: ERROR:tm:t_forward_nonack: failure to 
add branches

Cheers,

Henning