Hi,
Always CC the list.
then I dont know.. post your full config so people can see if they see
something
-A
* Tomasz Zieleniewski <tzieleniewski(a)gmail.com> [071124 20:38]:
> Hi,
>
> I had that parameter set to 0, but still no udp packets...
>
> On Nov 24, 2007 6:43 PM, Atle Samuelsen <clona(a)cyberhouse.no> wrote:
> > * Tomasz Zieleniewski <tzieleniewski(a)gmail.com> [071124 16:50]:
> >
> > > HI,
> > >
> > > I have the following nathelper settings:
> > > modparam("nathelper", "natping_interval", 20)
> > > modparam("nathelper", "ping_nated_only", 1)
> > > modparam("nathelper", "rtpproxy_disable", 1)
> > > modparam("nathelper", "tcpping_crlf", 1)
> > >
> > > But i cant see any udp packets being sent to registered users.
> > > Please point me what did I miss.
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > without seeing any more of your config, I'm guessing that you do not set
> > the natflag, so if you change ping_nated_only to 0, I think you will see
> > some udp packets.
> >
> > - Atle
> > (shot in the whild world of sip)
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Tomasz
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Serusers mailing list
> > > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org
> > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
> >
HI,
I have the following nathelper settings:
modparam("nathelper", "natping_interval", 20)
modparam("nathelper", "ping_nated_only", 1)
modparam("nathelper", "rtpproxy_disable", 1)
modparam("nathelper", "tcpping_crlf", 1)
But i cant see any udp packets being sent to registered users.
Please point me what did I miss.
Best
Tomasz
When I started using openser I used a patched version of 1.0 nathelper. This
patch created two formats for fix_nated_contact. There was the original
format -- fix_nated_contact() and the new format fix_nated_contact(1.2.3.4).
The original format appears to be useful for service providers. The new format
is useful when you are using openser as an ALG for a home or small office
phone system. The contact gets mangled before being sent to the registrar.
Because redoing the patch for each new version of openser that comes along is
silly, I had previously asked the list for an alternative. Someone suggested
using encode_contact from the mangler modules. This works but I think it is
sub-optimal when you have multiple phones with the same user name. Each one
creates its own contact with the registrar. The service providers server does
the forking and there is a lot of excess messaging with the INVITEs and
CANCELs when the call is answered by one of the phones. With
fix_nated_contact(1.2.3.4) there is only one location registered and the
local openser does the forking and the CANCELs are confined to the LAN.
Comments?
Rob
If I have only one rtp proxy should I use set_rtp_proxy_set("0")? I think openser should be smart enough to figure it out if there is only one rtp proxy.
It looks like there is a cut and paste error in the 1.3 nathelper wiki.
1.6.3. set_rtp_proxy_set()
Sets the Id of the rtpproxy set to be used for the next [un]force_rtp_proxy() command.
This function can be used from REQUEST_ROUTE, ONREPLY_ROUTE, BRANCH_ROUTE.
Example 1-17. fix_nated_contact usage
...
set_rtp_proxy_set("2");
force_rtp_proxy();
Rob
...
once again because to big attachments:)
On Nov 23, 2007 11:48 AM, Tomasz Zieleniewski <tzieleniewski(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> sorry I forgot to place the attachments
>
>
> On Nov 23, 2007 11:47 AM, Tomasz Zieleniewski <tzieleniewski(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Some more debug information:
> >
> > User contacts:
> > ser@sen:~/ser/ser-2.0/ssp$ ./serctl/ser_ctl usrloc show touk(a)voip.rd.touk.pl
> > sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP 3330 -1.0
> > sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1348;rinstance=e51fd20db73fc732;transport=TCP 3405 -1.0
> >
> > Contents of the location table:
> > mysql> select * from location where uid like 'touk@%';
> > +----------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+---------------------+----+----------------------------------------------+------+-------+----------------------------------+----------+
> > | uid | aor | contact
> > | received | expires
> > | q | callid | cseq
> > | flags | user_agent | instance |
> > +----------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+---------------------+----+----------------------------------------------+------+-------+----------------------------------+----------+
> > | touk(a)voip.rd.touk.pl | sip:touk@voip.rd.touk.pl |
> > sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP |
> > NULL | 2007-11-23 11:17:03 | -1 |
> > MTQ1ZWZmZWE2MWIxZjViYmVkNzZlNmU0YTEwNjRmMTA. | 4 | 0 | X-Lite
> > release 1011s stamp 41150 | NULL |
> > | touk(a)voip.rd.touk.pl | sip:touk@voip.rd.touk.pl |
> > sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1348;rinstance=e51fd20db73fc732;transport=TCP |
> > NULL | 2007-11-23 11:18:18 | -1 |
> > NDk0ZDA3ZmU5NmFlZmYyMjA5Mjc2ZTZiYTFmMTMxODY. | 4 | 0 | X-Lite
> > release 1011s stamp 41150 | NULL |
> > +----------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+---------------------+----+----------------------------------------------+------+-------+----------------------------------+----------+
> > 2 rows in set (0.00 sec)
> >
> >
> > Here is what does the internal proxy (192.168.0.165:7160) which is
> > registrar and perform location service,
> > the destination set contains both contacts and the first contact used
> > is the one which is unavailable.
> > this proxy sends first invite with this contact to boundary sip proxy
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: xlset_attr(bsp_route,
> > <$global_addr_bsp;lr=on>)
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: attr_destination($bsp_route)
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: ($fr_inv_timer)
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: t_on_reply(ONREPLY_ROUTE)
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: t_on_failure(FAILURE_ROUTE)
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: t_on_branch(BRANCH_ROUTE)
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: destination set:
> > Contact: sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP,
> > sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1348;rinstance=e51fd20db73fc732;transpo
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: next route: <null>
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: message's next hop:
> > sip:voip.rd.touk.pl:7060;lr=on
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: (!t_relay())
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]: <INVITE>
> > ruri:<sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP>
> > t:<sip:touk@voip.rd.touk.pl> f:<sip:hellboy@voip.rd.touk.pl> c
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]:
> > append_hf(P-Warn: forked branch)
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]: <INVITE>
> > ruri:<sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1348;rinstance=e51fd20db73fc732;transport=TCP>
> > t:<sip:touk@voip.rd.touk.pl> f:<sip:hellboy@voip.rd.touk.pl> c
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]:
> > append_hf(P-Warn: forked branch)
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: poll
> > error: flags 18
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: SO_ERROR
> > (111) Connection refused
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: tcpconn_connect:
> > tcp_blocking_connect failed
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: tcp_send: connect failed
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: msg_send: ERROR: tcp_send failed
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: t_send_branch: sending request
> > on branch 1 failed
> > Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: drop
> >
> > here is what happens in boundary sip proxy:
> > is receives the invite tries to do the t_rqlay but there is the tcp error.
> > t_relay() fails and it sends the sl_reply_error to internal sip proxy:
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: destination set: <null>
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: next route: <null>
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: message's next hop:
> > sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: (!t_relay())
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: poll
> > error: flags 18
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: SO_ERROR
> > (111) Connection refused
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: tcpconn_connect:
> > tcp_blocking_connect failed
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: tcp_send: connect failed
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: msg_send: ERROR: tcp_send failed
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: t_send_branch: sending request
> > on branch 0 failed
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: (!t_relay()) -> TRUE
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: sl_reply_error()
> > Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: sl_reply_error used: I'm
> > terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL)
> >
> > in the attachment there are ngrep and wireshark log from the same situation
> >
> > if you need more info please let me know
> > waiting for your feedback
> >
> > Cheers
> > tomasz
> >
> >
> >
> > On Nov 22, 2007 8:40 PM, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul <andrei(a)iptel.org> wrote:
> > > On Nov 16, 2007 at 14:43, Tomasz Zieleniewski (JIRA) <tracker(a)iptel.org> wrote:
> > > > tcp branching error
> > > > -------------------
> > > >
> > > > Key: SER-332
> > > > URL: http://tracker.iptel.org/browse/SER-332
> > > > Project: SER
> > > > Issue Type: Bug
> > > > Components: core
> > > > Affects Versions: 2.0
> > > > Environment: Linux sen 2.6.18-5-amd64 #1 SMP Tue Oct 2 20:37:02 UTC 2007 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> > > > Reporter: Tomasz Zieleniewski
> > > > Priority: Critical
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I have the following situation.
> > > > I have two ser rel_2_0_0 instances one acting as a boundary proxy the
> > > > other on as internal proxy (registrar, location).
> > > >
> > > > I have the following situation I have a user which has registered two
> > > > contacs one woth tcp transport the other one with udp.
> > > >
> > > > All messages coming to and outgoing from my network travels through
> > > > boundary sip proxy.
> > > >
> > > > When internal ser perform lookup_location it get to contacts and the
> > > > destination set contains two records:
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: route[FORWARD]: destination set:
> > > > Contact: sip:xlite@192.168.0.164:1221;rinstance=d35f9cda6bd79b0a;transport=TCP,
> > > > sip:xlite@192.168.0.164:7060
> > > >
> > > > Then internal ser forward message to boundary SIP proxy by changing
> > > > the destination of the message and with the usage of t_relay().
> > > > I see from log that there are two branches involved:
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]: <INVITE>
> > > > ruri:<sip:xlite@192.168.0.164:1221;rinstance=d35f9cda6bd79b0a;transport=TCP>
> > > > t:<sip:00@voip.rd.touk.pl> f:<sip:lkl@voip.rd.touk.pl>
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]:
> > > > append_hf(P-Warn: forked branch)
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]: <INVITE>
> > > > ruri:<sip:xlite@192.168.0.164:7060;rinstance=cfca8523e3747cb0>
> > > > t:<sip:00@voip.rd.touk.pl> f:<sip:lkl@voip.rd.touk.pl>
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]:
> > > > append_hf(P-Warn: forked branch)
> > > >
> > > > both INVITES reaches boudary SIP proxy.
> > > >
> > > > Because first contact was unreachable there was an tcp error:
> > > > ser[3516]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: poll error: flags 18
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: SO_ERROR
> > > > (111) Connection refused
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: ERROR: tcpconn_connect:
> > > > tcp_blocking_connect failed
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: ERROR: tcp_send: connect failed
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: msg_send: ERROR: tcp_send failed
> > > > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: ERROR: t_send_branch: sending request
> > > > on branch 0 failed
> > > >
> > > > after which ser invokes sl_reply_error() which results in 477 next hop
> > > > error reponse message sent to internal ser instance.
> > > > The problem arises when boudary sip proxy processes second INVITE
> > > > which correspond to second destination.
> > > > when boundary SIP proxy receives it doesn't send it to user agent but
> > > > instead reponses to internal ser with
> > > > 500 I'm terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL)
> > > > the only thing I see in the boundary SIP proxy log is:
> > > > ERROR: sl_reply_error used: I'm terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL)
> > > >
> > > > Did I miss something here or this is an error?
> > > > Waiting for Your feedback
> > > >
> > >
> > > Could you make some traffic dump between the 2 proxies and send it to me
> > > (andrei(a)iptel.org)?
> > > It's sounds quite strange (it should work without any problems) and a
> > > look at the packets might help.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Andrei
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Serdev mailing list
> > > Serdev(a)lists.iptel.org
> > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev
> > >
> >
>
Hi,
Some more debug information:
User contacts:
ser@sen:~/ser/ser-2.0/ssp$ ./serctl/ser_ctl usrloc show touk(a)voip.rd.touk.pl
sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP 3330 -1.0
sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1348;rinstance=e51fd20db73fc732;transport=TCP 3405 -1.0
Contents of the location table:
mysql> select * from location where uid like 'touk@%';
+----------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+---------------------+----+----------------------------------------------+------+-------+----------------------------------+----------+
| uid | aor | contact
| received | expires
| q | callid | cseq
| flags | user_agent | instance |
+----------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+---------------------+----+----------------------------------------------+------+-------+----------------------------------+----------+
| touk(a)voip.rd.touk.pl | sip:touk@voip.rd.touk.pl |
sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP |
NULL | 2007-11-23 11:17:03 | -1 |
MTQ1ZWZmZWE2MWIxZjViYmVkNzZlNmU0YTEwNjRmMTA. | 4 | 0 | X-Lite
release 1011s stamp 41150 | NULL |
| touk(a)voip.rd.touk.pl | sip:touk@voip.rd.touk.pl |
sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1348;rinstance=e51fd20db73fc732;transport=TCP |
NULL | 2007-11-23 11:18:18 | -1 |
NDk0ZDA3ZmU5NmFlZmYyMjA5Mjc2ZTZiYTFmMTMxODY. | 4 | 0 | X-Lite
release 1011s stamp 41150 | NULL |
+----------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+---------------------+----+----------------------------------------------+------+-------+----------------------------------+----------+
2 rows in set (0.00 sec)
Here is what does the internal proxy (192.168.0.165:7160) which is
registrar and perform location service,
the destination set contains both contacts and the first contact used
is the one which is unavailable.
this proxy sends first invite with this contact to boundary sip proxy
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: xlset_attr(bsp_route,
<$global_addr_bsp;lr=on>)
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: attr_destination($bsp_route)
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: ($fr_inv_timer)
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: t_on_reply(ONREPLY_ROUTE)
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: t_on_failure(FAILURE_ROUTE)
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: t_on_branch(BRANCH_ROUTE)
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: destination set:
Contact: sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP,
sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1348;rinstance=e51fd20db73fc732;transpo
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: next route: <null>
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: message's next hop:
sip:voip.rd.touk.pl:7060;lr=on
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: (!t_relay())
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]: <INVITE>
ruri:<sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP>
t:<sip:touk@voip.rd.touk.pl> f:<sip:hellboy@voip.rd.touk.pl> c
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]:
append_hf(P-Warn: forked branch)
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]: <INVITE>
ruri:<sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1348;rinstance=e51fd20db73fc732;transport=TCP>
t:<sip:touk@voip.rd.touk.pl> f:<sip:hellboy@voip.rd.touk.pl> c
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]:
append_hf(P-Warn: forked branch)
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: poll
error: flags 18
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: SO_ERROR
(111) Connection refused
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: tcpconn_connect:
tcp_blocking_connect failed
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: tcp_send: connect failed
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: msg_send: ERROR: tcp_send failed
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: ERROR: t_send_branch: sending request
on branch 1 failed
Nov 23 11:20:27 sen ser[28434]: route[FORWARD]: drop
here is what happens in boundary sip proxy:
is receives the invite tries to do the t_rqlay but there is the tcp error.
t_relay() fails and it sends the sl_reply_error to internal sip proxy:
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: destination set: <null>
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: next route: <null>
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: message's next hop:
sip:touk@192.168.0.164:1338;rinstance=191d670c84591ea3;transport=TCP
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: (!t_relay())
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: poll
error: flags 18
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: SO_ERROR
(111) Connection refused
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: tcpconn_connect:
tcp_blocking_connect failed
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: tcp_send: connect failed
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: msg_send: ERROR: tcp_send failed
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: t_send_branch: sending request
on branch 0 failed
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: (!t_relay()) -> TRUE
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: route[FORWARD]: sl_reply_error()
Nov 23 11:31:38 sen ser[31861]: ERROR: sl_reply_error used: I'm
terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL)
in the attachment there are ngrep and wireshark log from the same situation
if you need more info please let me know
waiting for your feedback
Cheers
tomasz
On Nov 22, 2007 8:40 PM, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul <andrei(a)iptel.org> wrote:
> On Nov 16, 2007 at 14:43, Tomasz Zieleniewski (JIRA) <tracker(a)iptel.org> wrote:
> > tcp branching error
> > -------------------
> >
> > Key: SER-332
> > URL: http://tracker.iptel.org/browse/SER-332
> > Project: SER
> > Issue Type: Bug
> > Components: core
> > Affects Versions: 2.0
> > Environment: Linux sen 2.6.18-5-amd64 #1 SMP Tue Oct 2 20:37:02 UTC 2007 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> > Reporter: Tomasz Zieleniewski
> > Priority: Critical
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have the following situation.
> > I have two ser rel_2_0_0 instances one acting as a boundary proxy the
> > other on as internal proxy (registrar, location).
> >
> > I have the following situation I have a user which has registered two
> > contacs one woth tcp transport the other one with udp.
> >
> > All messages coming to and outgoing from my network travels through
> > boundary sip proxy.
> >
> > When internal ser perform lookup_location it get to contacts and the
> > destination set contains two records:
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: route[FORWARD]: destination set:
> > Contact: sip:xlite@192.168.0.164:1221;rinstance=d35f9cda6bd79b0a;transport=TCP,
> > sip:xlite@192.168.0.164:7060
> >
> > Then internal ser forward message to boundary SIP proxy by changing
> > the destination of the message and with the usage of t_relay().
> > I see from log that there are two branches involved:
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]: <INVITE>
> > ruri:<sip:xlite@192.168.0.164:1221;rinstance=d35f9cda6bd79b0a;transport=TCP>
> > t:<sip:00@voip.rd.touk.pl> f:<sip:lkl@voip.rd.touk.pl>
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]:
> > append_hf(P-Warn: forked branch)
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]: <INVITE>
> > ruri:<sip:xlite@192.168.0.164:7060;rinstance=cfca8523e3747cb0>
> > t:<sip:00@voip.rd.touk.pl> f:<sip:lkl@voip.rd.touk.pl>
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3673]: branch_route[BRANCH_ROUTE]:
> > append_hf(P-Warn: forked branch)
> >
> > both INVITES reaches boudary SIP proxy.
> >
> > Because first contact was unreachable there was an tcp error:
> > ser[3516]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: poll error: flags 18
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: ERROR: tcp_blocking_connect: SO_ERROR
> > (111) Connection refused
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: ERROR: tcpconn_connect:
> > tcp_blocking_connect failed
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: ERROR: tcp_send: connect failed
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: msg_send: ERROR: tcp_send failed
> > Nov 15 11:03:13 sen ser[3516]: ERROR: t_send_branch: sending request
> > on branch 0 failed
> >
> > after which ser invokes sl_reply_error() which results in 477 next hop
> > error reponse message sent to internal ser instance.
> > The problem arises when boudary sip proxy processes second INVITE
> > which correspond to second destination.
> > when boundary SIP proxy receives it doesn't send it to user agent but
> > instead reponses to internal ser with
> > 500 I'm terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL)
> > the only thing I see in the boundary SIP proxy log is:
> > ERROR: sl_reply_error used: I'm terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL)
> >
> > Did I miss something here or this is an error?
> > Waiting for Your feedback
> >
>
> Could you make some traffic dump between the 2 proxies and send it to me
> (andrei(a)iptel.org)?
> It's sounds quite strange (it should work without any problems) and a
> look at the packets might help.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Andrei
> _______________________________________________
> Serdev mailing list
> Serdev(a)lists.iptel.org
> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev
>