Indeed, this is not implemented correctly.
If you fix it, the question is: what should be used if there are SRV
records for UDP and TCP?
AFAIK there is already a configuration option to choose the respective
NAPTR records according to local priority. These config options could be
reused.
See dns_udp_pref/dns_tcp_pref/... options in doc/dns.txt
regards
Klaus
On 29.10.2012 16:33, MÉSZÁROS Mihály wrote:
Hi All,
I am experiencing an issue when i try to contact xy(a)cisco.com.
I found that kamailio/sip-router can't resolve by default resolving way
a TCP + SRV records from domain
cisco.com.
e.g.
cisco.com
misi@alma:~$ host -t NAPTR
cisco.com
cisco.com has no NAPTR record
misi@alma:~$ host -t SRV
_sip._udp.cisco.com
Host
_sip._udp.cisco.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
misi@alma:~$ host -t SRV
_sip._tcp.cisco.com
_sip._tcp.cisco.com has SRV record 1 0 5060
vcsgw.cisco.com.
misi@alma:~$ host -t SRV
_sips._tcp.cisco.com
_sips._tcp.cisco.com has SRV record 1 0 5061
vcsgw.cisco.com.
I can't call xy(a)cisco.com because it does not exists an NAPTR record in
domain
cisco.com,
and furthermore no SRV with udp.
But it exists sip+tcp record
and also exists an secure sip SRV, so sips+tcp record!
I read rfc3263
I find kamailio dns resolver is not working as it should according RFC3263.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3263
_If no NAPTR records are found, the client constructs SRV queries
for those transport protocols it supports, and does a query for each._
So kamailio should query all (udp, tcp, tls, sctp whatever) protocols.
Can anyone help/guide me to create a fix to this issue?
My plan is to create a patch to kamailio resolver, to correct and behave
according RFC3263.
Any help or guidance appreciated!
Thanks,
Misi
_______________________________________________
sr-dev mailing list
sr-dev(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev