sr-users December 2004

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

184 participants
400 discussions

RE: [Serusers] rtpproxy + nathelper problem

by Ricardo Martinez

Hello Thomas. I think you're missing a few important things. First i don't see any checks for NAT'd endpoints, you need to do something like this: if (nat_uac_test(1)) setflag(1); force_rport(); fix_nated_contact(); then in the INVITE: if (method=="INVITE") { record_route(); if (isflagset(1)) fix_nated_sdp("3"); }; /* set up reply processing */ t_on_reply("1"); }; I'm using mediaproxy, so i am not sure about this, maybe somone that's using the nathelper module can help you better... you can check the example configuration file in the /modules/nathelper directory, that could give you some clues. + Cheers. Ricardo -----Mensaje original----- De: support [mailto:support@cybertel.biz] Enviado el: Miércoles, 15 de Diciembre de 2004 4:38 Para: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org Asunto: [Serusers] rtpproxy + nathelper problem Hi, I have installed the latest rtpproxy and run it with ser-0.8-14. I have also include nathelper modules. When I try to register a siprua gateway with SER, the IP is still 192.168.1.xx. It cannot be translated to NAT public IP. Why is that so? Thanks. Thomas Appendix: my ser.cfg -------------------------------------------------- # # $Id: ser.cfg,v 1.21 2003/06/04 13:47:36 jiri Exp $ # # simple quick-start config script # # ----------- global configuration parameters ------------------------ debug=3 # debug level (cmd line: -dddddddddd) fork=yes log_stderror=no # (cmd line: -E) /* Uncomment these lines to enter debugging mode debug=7 fork=no log_stderror=yes */ check_via=no # (cmd. line: -v) dns=no # (cmd. line: -r) rev_dns=no # (cmd. line: -R) port=5060 children=4 fifo="/tmp/ser_fifo" alias=mydomain.dyndns.org # ------------------ module loading ---------------------------------- loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/nathelper.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/textops.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/tm.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/rr.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/maxfwd.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/usrloc.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/registrar.so" # ----------------- setting module-specific parameters --------------- # -- usrloc params -- modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 0) # -- rr params -- # add value to ;lr param to make some broken UAs happy modparam("rr", "enable_full_lr", 1) # ------------------------- request routing logic ------------------- # main routing logic route{ # initial sanity checks -- messages with # max_forwards==0, or excessively long requests if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) { sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops"); break; }; if (len_gt( max_len )) { sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); break; }; # we record-route all messages -- to make sure that # subsequent messages will go through our proxy; that's # particularly good if upstream and downstream entities # use different transport protocol record_route(); # loose-route processing if (loose_route()) { t_relay(); break; }; # if the request is for other domain use UsrLoc # (in case, it does not work, use the following command # with proper names and addresses in it) if (uri==myself) { if (method=="REGISTER") { save("location"); break; }; # native SIP destinations are handled using our USRLOC DB if (!lookup("location")) { sl_send_reply("404", "Not Found"); break; }; }; #inserted by klaus if (method=="INVITE") { record_route(); force_rtp_proxy(); /* set up reply processing */ t_on_reply("1"); }; # forward to current uri now; use stateful forwarding; that # works reliably even if we forward from TCP to UDP if (!t_relay()) { sl_reply_error(); }; } #inserted by klaus # all incoming replies for t_onrepli-ed transactions enter here onreply_route[1] { if (status=~"[12][0-9][0-9]") force_rtp_proxy(); } _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list serusers(a)lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

19 years, 8 months

[Serusers] mediaproxy - strange error

by DDX66

I am having the following strange error - SER is on public IP and Asterisk is on a private IP - My x.lite is on a public IP and registers fine with SER. Mediaproxy is running on SER too. When I make a call, SER forwards the call to Asterisk but the mediaproxy gives me the following error: ----- Dec 15 15:18:57 linux-ser mediaproxy[2360]: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/etc/ser/mediaproxy/modules/rtphandler.py", line 819, in __findRTPSlot dsock.bind((proxyIP, port)) File "<string>", line 1, in bind error: (99, 'Cannot assign requested address') Dec 15 15:18:57 linux-ser mediaproxy[2360]: error: cannot create session for 'DB740095-C810-4628-8DE6-9D9DF74E0E74(a)X.Y.X.X': cannot find enough free ports for the media streams Dec 15 15:18:57 linux-ser mediaproxy[2360]: command execution time: 79.39 ms Dec 15 15:18:57 linux-ser proxydispatcher[2363]: forwarding to mediaproxy on /var/run/mediaproxy.sock: got: '' Dec 15 15:18:57 linux-ser proxydispatcher[2363]: command execution time: 442.78 ms Dec 15 15:18:57 linux-ser /usr/local/sbin/ser[2763]: error: use_media_proxy(): empty response from mediaproxy ------ Any ideas what the bind error is? I assume mediaproxy is already "binded" to the port it listens on? Any pointers will be greatly appreciated. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com

19 years, 8 months

[Serusers] nat and multi domain problem

by Higuera, Antonio

hi, I am new is this list and also in ser, sorry is the problem has a stupid solution. I am configuring a ser sip server with the following features: - Nat support with nathelper - Multidomain support with domain module. modparam("usrloc", "use_domain", 1) modparam("registrar", "use_domain", 1) All my uas are behind a nat box without sip support, therefore I fix_nated_contact in order to have a valid contact in location dadabase. The registration procedure works fine, and i can start a call with INVITE, the problem is when the caller send the ACK because in the request field get the contact in the user@ip_address:port way. The proxy is answering with "Not found" (because modparam("usrloc", "use_domain", 1), I guess.....), and from this point everything fail is the dialog. Any idea? Thanks very much for your help Antonio Higuera.

19 years, 8 months

[Serusers] Two Question for SER Users.

by Ricardo Martinez

Hello List. I have two questions. First. I wan to know how this configuration works. if (method=="INVITE") { if ( !radius_proxy_authorize("")) { proxy_challenge("", "1"); log (1, "LOG: Llamada no AUTORIZADA\n"); break; }; When a endpoint is unahutorized to make a call, and my radius server answer with "Authentication Reject", i don't see my log messsage in the standard out, ("LLamada no AUTORIZADA"), even with log level = 3. I was trying to see how this authorization works. For example i see in my debugs something like this : --> INVITE sip:7515960@mydomain.com SIP/2.0. <-- SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required. --> ACK sip:7515960@sipvoiss.desarrollo.redvoiss.net SIP/2.0. --> INVITE sip:7515960@sipvoiss.desarrollo.redvoiss.net SIP/2.0. w/Digest <-- SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required. --> ACK sip:7515960@sipvoiss.desarrollo.redvoiss.net SIP/2.0. --> INVITE sip:7515960@sipvoiss.desarrollo.redvoiss.net SIP/2.0. w/Digest <-- SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required. --> ACK sip:7515960@sipvoiss.desarrollo.redvoiss.net SIP/2.0. At any time i see a "Unauthorized message" coming from my SER, i don't even see my log message. Is there a way to answer with a message like this? SIP/2.0 404 Unauthorized - LLAMADA NO AUTORIZADA EN ESTE SERVER. Hope that someone can help me here. Second Question. I was trying to restrict the domains that i can serve in my SER. I'm doing this with the alias=domain1.com , etc and the uri=myself. Is this a secure way to do this?. And what happend when someone try to reach me with my own IP server address?. For example a INVITE message with INVITE sip:7515960@ip.of.my.ser.server SIP/2.0. By default the uri=myself permits this IP? Thanks in advance Best Regards. Ricardo Martinez.-

19 years, 8 months

[Serusers] Routing

by Gabriel Viganotti

Hi! IŽm trying to make a dialing plan with ser. So i have configurated the ser.cfg in order to route for some especific destinations to other SIP proxies. But some of them need digest authentication and I need to do it on the ser. The scenario would be like this: 1- A sip client, which is registered in my ser proxy, tries to make a call to a destination that doesnŽt belong to my network. 2- So ser should route this call to a third party proxy, which provides call termination (I have an account in this third party proxy). 3- When ser routes the call to that proxy, this response with challenge for authentication. The question would be: How do I reply to that challenge with ser ? Is it posible to do this with ser ? Thanks a lot ! Regards, Gabriel

19 years, 8 months

[Serusers] username in from field

by Carlos Mauricio

Hi, How can I get the username in from field? Thanks, Carlos

19 years, 8 months

RE: [Serusers] SIP-T Support

by Darren Nay

>From what I understand (Anybody, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) SER doesn't care whether the packet is SIP-T or SIP. It will relay it to the destination regardless. We used SIP-T for 3 months with SER and had no issues. Tip: Just don't try to use SIP-T with Asterisk. Unless they have made some changes recently for SIP-T support, asterisk does not like SIP-T. Darren > -----Original Message----- > From: Danny Moghnie [mailto:danny@ivoicelynx.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 2:42 AM > To: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org > Subject: [Serusers] SIP-T Support > > Does SER support SIP-T > > Danny Moghnie, > > iVoiceLynx > > > _______________________________________________ > Serusers mailing list > serusers(a)lists.iptel.org > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

19 years, 8 months

RE: [Serusers] rtpproxy + nathelper problem

by Matt Schulte

First off, make sure your sipura has NAT mapping enabled, this must be done in the "Advanced" options under the lineX menu. Second, it sounds like your getting stuck in the register (not the invite?). Here is a snippet of my config, I took it from (Java?) the list and modified it to suit my needs. This should go near the top of your routing. It's my understand that all NAT clients get tagged before any other info is passed, else it may not get there. This should at least get your registering. good luck! if (nat_uac_test("3")) { # Allow RR-ed requests, as these may indicate that # a NAT-enabled proxy takes care of it; unless it is # a REGISTER if (method == "REGISTER" || ! search("^Record-Route:")) { log(1, "LOG: Someone trying to register from private IP, rewriting\n"); # This will work only for user agents that support symmetric # communication. We tested quite many of them and majority is # smart enough to be symmetric. In some phones it takes a configuration # option. With Cisco 7960, it is called NAT_Enable=Yes, with kphone it is # called "symmetric media" and "symmetric signalling". if (!search("(c|Contact): .*(a)xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx" )) { log(1, "NOT LEVEL 3, FIXXING NATTED CONTACT\n"); fix_nated_contact(); # Rewrite contact with source IP of signalling } if (method == "INVITE") { fix_nated_sdp("1"); # Add direction=active to SDP }; force_rport(); # Add rport parameter to topmost Via setflag(6); # Mark as NATed }; }; -----Original Message----- From: support [mailto:support@cybertel.biz] Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 2:38 AM To: serusers(a)lists.iptel.org Subject: [Serusers] rtpproxy + nathelper problem Hi, I have installed the latest rtpproxy and run it with ser-0.8-14. I have also include nathelper modules. When I try to register a siprua gateway with SER, the IP is still 192.168.1.xx. It cannot be translated to NAT public IP. Why is that so? Thanks. Thomas Appendix: my ser.cfg -------------------------------------------------- # # $Id: ser.cfg,v 1.21 2003/06/04 13:47:36 jiri Exp $ # # simple quick-start config script # # ----------- global configuration parameters ------------------------ debug=3 # debug level (cmd line: -dddddddddd) fork=yes log_stderror=no # (cmd line: -E) /* Uncomment these lines to enter debugging mode debug=7 fork=no log_stderror=yes */ check_via=no # (cmd. line: -v) dns=no # (cmd. line: -r) rev_dns=no # (cmd. line: -R) port=5060 children=4 fifo="/tmp/ser_fifo" alias=mydomain.dyndns.org # ------------------ module loading ---------------------------------- loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/nathelper.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/textops.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/sl.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/tm.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/rr.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/maxfwd.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/usrloc.so" loadmodule "/usr/local/lib/ser/modules/registrar.so" # ----------------- setting module-specific parameters --------------- # -- usrloc params -- modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 0) # -- rr params -- # add value to ;lr param to make some broken UAs happy modparam("rr", "enable_full_lr", 1) # ------------------------- request routing logic ------------------- # main routing logic route{ # initial sanity checks -- messages with # max_forwards==0, or excessively long requests if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) { sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops"); break; }; if (len_gt( max_len )) { sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big"); break; }; # we record-route all messages -- to make sure that # subsequent messages will go through our proxy; that's # particularly good if upstream and downstream entities # use different transport protocol record_route(); # loose-route processing if (loose_route()) { t_relay(); break; }; # if the request is for other domain use UsrLoc # (in case, it does not work, use the following command # with proper names and addresses in it) if (uri==myself) { if (method=="REGISTER") { save("location"); break; }; # native SIP destinations are handled using our USRLOC DB if (!lookup("location")) { sl_send_reply("404", "Not Found"); break; }; }; #inserted by klaus if (method=="INVITE") { record_route(); force_rtp_proxy(); /* set up reply processing */ t_on_reply("1"); }; # forward to current uri now; use stateful forwarding; that # works reliably even if we forward from TCP to UDP if (!t_relay()) { sl_reply_error(); }; } #inserted by klaus # all incoming replies for t_onrepli-ed transactions enter here onreply_route[1] { if (status=~"[12][0-9][0-9]") force_rtp_proxy(); } _______________________________________________ Serusers mailing list serusers(a)lists.iptel.org http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers

19 years, 8 months

[Serusers] serweb php scripts could not open ser_fifo for writing ...

by alhezmi＠yahoo.de

Hello all, I've just installed the serweb interface in a running ser environment. In spite of changing the access mode of the ser_fifo (stored in /tmp) to allow php scripts for reading and writing, php scripts send the following error message to my web browser "sorry -- cannot open write fifo". Since the ser_fifo file location is under the /tmp directory, I didn't change the value of the fifo_server parameter in the config.php script. The question is: is the value path of the ser_fifo relative to the running script (functions.php) or absolute? Best regard, ===== Al-Hezmi, Adel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Home page: www.cs.tu-berlin.de/~adelhazm ___________________________________________________________ Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 250MB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden: http://mail.yahoo.de

19 years, 8 months

[Serusers] Iconnect account on SER

by Ritesh Jalan

Hi! How to configure a iconnecthere account on SER for all out going calls? Did somebody configured iconnect account as a static routing for forwarding calls Thanks & Regards Ritesh Jalan

19 years, 8 months

← Newer
1
...
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
...
40
Older →

Jump to page:

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 December 2004