sr-users February 2003

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

45 participants
91 discussions

by Jev

Hello all, Im using ser, with esteras softphone, and a couple of cisco ata186's. I have to say I really like ser, as it is small fast, and reliable without being over complicated. I would like to know what other ser users and developers use for pstn gateways? I have a openline4 card from voictronix, but there is no software support for sip (When I bought it I thought I would use h.323). I have looked at cisco's pstn gateway modules, but was turned off them because of price, and lack of clear straight forward information to name but two reasons. Ideally what I would like to have is a solution that would support at least 4 pstn lines (expandable to maybe 8), that would run on FreeBSD (or at worst linux), works well with sip & ser, with high quality audio, and minimal delays when dialing in out. TIA, -Emil

21 years, 4 months

[Serusers] User Based Dialplans

by Fernando Nachtigall

Hi All, I need to implement an used based dialplans module on SER, so that depending on the user information stored in the database, a certain prefix should be inserted in the called number. Has anyone had a similar issue? Thanks Fernando --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.474 / Virus Database: 272 - Release Date: 4/18/2003

21 years, 6 months

[Serusers] Serious defficiencies of the t_on_negative feature

by Maxim Sobolev

Folks, I am currently playing with t_on_negative feature trying to implement overflow routing (i.e. if original destination returns an error, then request should be adjusted somehow and redirected to some, possibly different, destination). I've started with the following config: route { [...] rewriteFromRoute(); if (method == "INVITE") { addRecordRoute(); }; if (method == "INVITE) { t_on_negative("1"); }; t_relay_to("address1", "port1"); } reply_route[1] { rewritehostport("address2:port2"); append_branch(); } But quickly found that after transaction was redirected to address2:port2, ACKs, BYEs, 200K and CANCELS are still being forwarded to address1:port1, despite containing valid Route fields pointing to address2:port2. Then I've modified it as follows to let ser use information from that field to route ACKs, 200OKs and BYEs: route { [...] rewriteFromRoute(); if (method == "INVITE") { addRecordRoute(); }; if (method == "INVITE" || method == "CANCEL") { # INVITEs and CANCELs if (method == "INVITE) { t_on_negative("1"); }; t_relay_to("address1", "port1"); } else { # ACKs, 200OKs, BYEs t_relay(); }; } reply_route[1] { rewritehostport("address2:port2"); append_branch(); } For the most of the time everything works like a charm - if address1:port1 is unreachable or replies with an error the request is being redirected to the second destination, BUT if the initiating UA tries to cancel transaction when transaction is already redirected but before receiving final "200 OK" from the second destination, the CANCEL request is forwarded to address1:port1, not to address2:port2 as it should be. I've tried to modify setup as follows, thinking that maybe in the case of CANCEL explicit specification of proxy address confuses ser, but no avail - in this case ser forwards the CANCEL request to its own address and eventually it dies with Too Many Hops. route { [...] rewriteFromRoute(); if (method == "INVITE") { addRecordRoute(); }; if (method == "INVITE") { # INVITEs t_on_negative("1"); t_relay_to("address1", "port1"); } else { # CANCELs, ACKs, 200OKs, BYEs t_relay(); }; } reply_route[1] { rewritehostport("address2:port2"); append_branch(); } I think that such behaviour arises from the fact that ser after branching a transaction doesn't keep an address this transaction was forwarded to. In my opinion, it needs to be corrected, so that after receiving CANCEL from the UA that initiated transaction ser probably should CANCEL *all* branches of this transaction. To do this it needs to be able to tell exactly where to send CANCELs. What do you think? -Maxim

21 years, 7 months

[Serusers] Some Module Questions

by Stephan Reiff-Marganiec

Hi, Context: I am currently writing a module that allows me to connect to a policy server -- not unlike CPL. It essentially routes the message out to the server and then receives a response. I get the message out ok, and will receive a complete sip message back. The module main function is called in the ser.cfg. Here are my questions: 1) how do I get a message that I have received -- say in char *msg_buf -- to be the message that is used for further routing? The policy server might have changed any header fields or even created a (or several) completely new message(s). 2) can the module send back intermediate messages, such as 1xx info, while it is still continuing its work? This is to provide the user with feedback should things take while ... 3) I also want the module to react to SIP response messages (4xx and so). I assumed providing a response_function would do this, but apparently not (I had a simple one which was just LOGging some text to the system log, but it never did create any entries). So how can I do this? thanks, Stephan -- Dr Stephan Reiff-Marganiec Research Fellow Department of Computing Science; University of Stirling email: srm(a)cs.stir.ac.uk tel: 01786 46 7448 -- The University of Stirling is a university established in Scotland by charter at Stirling, FK9 4LA. Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not disclose, copy or deliver this message to anyone and any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of the University of Stirling shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

21 years, 8 months

[Serusers] no mysql authentication on solaris8

by Kamil Ince

thx for the help so far, but the adventure continues: compiled latest ser from CVS on sol8 from scratch.. and still using the same ser.cfg but can't start ser anymore, that's what the log shows: 0(15264) loading module /usr/local/lib/ser/modules/mysql.so 0(15264) loading module /usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so 0(15264) loading module /usr/local/lib/ser/modules/tm.so 0(15264) loading module /usr/local/lib/ser/modules/rr.so 0(15264) loading module /usr/local/lib/ser/modules/maxfwd.so 0(15264) loading module /usr/local/lib/ser/modules/usrloc.so 0(15264) loading module /usr/local/lib/ser/modules/registrar.so 0(15264) loading module /usr/local/lib/ser/modules/auth.so 0(15264) find_param_export: found <db_mode> in module usrloc [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/usrloc.so] 0(15264) find_param_export: found <calculate_ha1> in module auth [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/auth.so] 0(15264) find_param_export: found <password_column> in module auth [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/auth.so] 0(15264) find_export: found <mf_process_maxfwd_header> in module maxfwd_module [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/maxfwd.so] 0(15264) find_export: found <sl_send_reply> in module sl_module [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so] 0(15264) find_export: found <sl_send_reply> in module sl_module [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so] 0(15264) find_export: <rewriteFromRoute> not found 0(15264) parse error (79,19-20): unknown command, missing loadmodule? 0(15264) find_export: found <www_authorize> in module auth [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/auth.so] 0(15264) find_export: found <www_challenge> in module auth [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/auth.so] 0(15264) find_export: found <save> in module registrar [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/registrar.so] 0(15264) find_export: found <lookup> in module registrar [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/registrar.so] 0(15264) find_export: found <sl_send_reply> in module sl_module [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so] 0(15264) find_export: found <t_relay> in module tm [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/tm.so] 0(15264) find_export: found <sl_reply_error> in module sl_module [/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so] ERROR: bad config file (1 errors) 0(15264) INFO: signal 15 received 0(15264) Memory status (pkg): 0(15264) qm_status (72d38): 0(15264) heap size= 1022872 0(15264) used= 0, used+overhead=25704, free=997168 0(15264) max used (+overhead)= 25704 0(15264) dumping all allocked. fragments: 0(15264) dumping free list stats : 0(15264) hash= 521. fragments no.: 1 0(15264) ----------------------------- anyone a pointer to what i have missed? tia again -k

21 years, 8 months

[Serusers] ser.cfg overwrite

by lgfausak＠august.net

i was messing around with the postgres build over the last couple of days. I've rebuilt it several times. A few make installs later I went back to edit my ser.cfg file, it was overwritten by the new installation. ouch... ---greg Greg Fausak

21 years, 8 months

[Serusers] IPv6 SIP UA

by jaime.gill＠orange.co.uk

Hi, Is anyone aware of any IPv6 compliant SIP softphone? When will sipsak implement this feature? Jaime ******************************************************************************* Important. Confidentiality: This communication is intended for the above-named person and may be confidential and/or legally privileged. Any opinions expressed in this communication are not necessarily those of the company. If it has come to you in error you must take no action based on it, nor must you copy or show it to anyone; please delete/destroy and inform the sender immediately. Monitoring/Viruses Orange may monitor all incoming and outgoing emails in line with current legislation. Although we have taken steps to ensure that this email and attachments are free from any virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free. Orange PCS Limited is a subsidiary of Orange SA and is registered in England No 2178917, with its address at St James Court, Great Park Road, Almondsbury Park, Bradley Stoke, Bristol BS32 4QJ. *******************************************************************************

21 years, 8 months

[Serusers] auth.so modules and digest auth

by Benny Ho

I load the auth.so and the default config. Uncomment those to use auth.so But when I call up two user agents not register in the database. The only difference is there a warning for registration. They are still calling each other. Why?

21 years, 8 months

[Serusers] postgres db support

by lgfausak＠august.net

Has anybody started on support for Postgres? I've checked out the layering and it seems to be a fairly modular project. I haven't coded in C for quite some time, but I think I can handle it. Any hints? Should I even try? The only thing I can see having problems with is the build/configure system. How do I hook in a new module? How are include directories and new libraries added? I was pretty good with make, gmake, imake in my day but I can't seem to find the head of the Make tree! ---greg Greg Fausak

21 years, 8 months

[Serusers] what makes a transaction?

by lgfausak＠august.net

I'm trying to understand stateful vs. stateless transactions. A stateless 'transaction' simply lasts as long as it takes to process the current sip request. It is then forgotten. However, a stateful transaction I'm having a little problem grasping. For instance, if I t_relay() an INVITE, logically the transaction is started....so when the response comes it isn't delivered to the main route {} block, but instead it is delivered to the awaiting stateful t_relay(), probably keyed by callid. So, for instance: INVITE <- 401 Unauthorized -> Is this entire sequence a transaction? Right after this the UA sends an ACK, this is a transaction unto itself? ACK <- The UA then sends : INVITE <- 100 Trying -> 180 Ringing -> 200 OK -> All of these messages are a 'transaction' handled by t_relay()? The next transaction is: ACK <- Finally, the last transaction would be (as an example): BYE <- 200 OK -> So the ser route{} block would need to recognize and handle INVITE ACK BYE in this context. Is that correct? If I was running 'statelessly' I would need to handle and send every single message listed? ---greg

21 years, 8 months

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

sr-users February 2003