9 Apr
2011
9 Apr
'11
12:20 a.m.
Hello,
I think I have found two bugs in nathelper in Kamailio 3.1.3.
Has anyone else encountered these?
Bug one
-------
nat_uac_test() doesn't seem to work for requests that arrive over UDP. I
tried with the latest versions of X-Lite and Jitsi for Windows and
observed the same behaviour with both. As far as I could tell the UDP and
TCP REGISTER methods were identical except for transport, Call-ID, tags
(and so on).
At the moment I have worked around this by treating all UDP requests as if
they have come from behind a NAT - but this is not ideal.
Bug Two
-------
nat_uac_test() with flag bit 8 (SDP checks) set fails with an error if the
request does not contain SDP. I don't think this is correct behaviour as
it seems quite sensible to me to push all requests through the same NAT
detection route. In this case it is quite likely that only some of the
methods will contain SDP.
Surely in this case the correct thing would be for the SDP checks to fail,
but not be treated as an error?
Thanks for you help,
Peter
--
Peter Dunkley
Technical Director
Crocodile RCS Ltd
11 Apr
11 Apr
12:32 p.m.
New subject: [SR-Users] Possible bugs in nathelper
I tried 63 (all), 55 (all but SDP), and 19 (from the sample
configuration file).
I will try it again today.
Peter
On Sat, 2011-04-09 at 08:10 +0300, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Peter Dunkley writes:
--
Peter Dunkley
Technical Director
Crocodile RCS Ltd
nat_uac_test() doesn't seem to work for
requests that arrive over UDP.
i don't know which param you tried, but nat_uac_test("2") and
nat_uac_test("1") works for me.
-- juha
_______________________________________________
SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list
sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users
2:06 p.m.
New subject: [SR-Users] Possible bugs in nathelper
Hello,
I have done some more detailed testing today and am still seeing the
problem. I am using Kamailio 3.1.3.
I added the following to the beginning of my route{ } section:
if (nat_uac_test(flags))
xlog("NAT'd\n");
I then tested the following scenarios using X-Lite 4:
* Flags = 1, TCP: NAT detected, UDP: NAT not detected
* Flags = 2, TCP: NAT detected, UDP: NAT not detected
* Flags = 4, TCP: NAT detected, UDP: NAT not detected
* Flags = 8, TCP: NAT not detected, UDP: NAT not detected
* Flags = 16, TCP: NAT detected, UDP: NAT not detected
* Flags = 32, TCP: NAT not detected, UDP: NAT not detected
The REGISTERs (for TCP and UDP) sent by X-Lite were (with domain and
user name obscured here):
REGISTER sip:example.com SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP
192.168.0.187:15854;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-1c8ee3e957b12a9b-1---d8754z-;rport
Max-Forwards: 70
Contact:
<sip:user@192.168.0.187:15854;rinstance=80c5894ae6e2ce6f;transport=TCP>
To: "User"<sip:user@example.com>
From: "User"<sip:user@example.com>;tag=da2c294e
Call-ID: NjA3YjNiNDdjZTgwNWVkYzZlOGRkZTU0NTkxNDlkZWQ.
CSeq: 1 REGISTER
Expires: 25
Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY,
MESSAGE, SUBSCRIBE, INFO
User-Agent: X-Lite 4 release 4.0 stamp 58832
Content-Length: 0
REGISTER sip:example.com SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP
192.168.0.187:53264;branch=z9hG4bK-d8754z-a959b8f7e5f1e349-1---d8754z-;rport
Max-Forwards: 70
Contact:
<sip:user@192.168.0.187:53264;rinstance=d601b2ea0398567c;transport=udp>
To: "Peter Dunkley"<sip:user@example.com>
From: "Peter Dunkley"<sip:user@example.com>;tag=753afc8a
Call-ID: NjBmZmFhNjEzNTFkZGZlMWQwNzdlZjlkYTE1OTc4ZGU.
CSeq: 1 REGISTER
Expires: 25
Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, NOTIFY,
MESSAGE, SUBSCRIBE, INFO
User-Agent: X-Lite 4 release 4.0 stamp 58832
Content-Length: 0
Regards,
Peter
On Mon, 2011-04-11 at 10:32 +0100, Peter Dunkley wrote:
I tried 63 (all), 55 (all but SDP), and 19 (from the
sample
configuration file).
I will try it again today.
Peter
On Sat, 2011-04-09 at 08:10 +0300, Juha Heinanen wrote:
> Peter Dunkley writes:
>
> > nat_uac_test() doesn't seem to work for requests that arrive over UDP.
>
> i don't know which param you tried, but nat_uac_test("2") and
> nat_uac_test("1") works for me.
>
> -- juha
>
--
Peter Dunkley
Technical Director
Crocodile RCS Ltd
6:33 p.m.
New subject: [SR-Users] Possible bugs in nathelper
I found the problem. My LAN router had the very helpful SIP application
gateway setting turned on. This was changing the IP addresses in some,
but not all, SIP messages that passed through it - and only from UDP.
From Kamailio's point-of-view I was not behind a
NAT. However, the
application gateway setting itself still wasn't doing enough
to make
calls work.
Thanks for you help,
Peter
On Mon, 2011-04-11 at 17:36 +0300, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Peter Dunkley writes:
--
Peter Dunkley
Technical Director
Crocodile RCS Ltd
if (nat_uac_test(flags))
xlog("NAT'd\n");
put xlog call printing contact header before the if, replace flags with
"1", and add also else part. then make the udp test and send result to
the list.
-- juha
_______________________________________________
sr-dev mailing list
sr-dev(a)lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
4975
days inactive
4978
days old
5 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Juha Heinanen -
Peter Dunkley