sr-users May 2007

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

164 participants
295 discussions

[Users] call transfer to asterik.. asterisk as an end point

by zm23

> > Hello All. > I am having some trouble with call transfers when asterisk is > the 2nd party called and I hope to benefit from your experience. > > I want to use asterisk for call park/pickup and have configured > openser to relay calls made to ruri 700-720 to asterisk running on > localhost:5069 > > > Call flow: > > phone A calls phone B (both phones are polycom) > > Phone B answers > > then phone b user presses transfer and dials 700 > > asterisk plays back 701 as the parking lot location > > phone B user presses transfer again. > at this time phone b is not disconnected from asterisk system > phone A is also connected to asterisk and hears 702 as the > parking lot location (as if asterisk places the user at priority 1 > for that > context) > > > From phone C calling 702 will connect phone C to phone A. > > > This was a specific example but this transfer problem is not > limited to call park only. It happens any time asterisk is the > second party called in call transfer. > > Thanks in advance for your help. > > -- > Zahid > > > > > > On May 8, 2007, at 1:56 PM, Christian Schlatter wrote: > > > > I think I found out why this doesn't work as expected. After phone > 1 receives REFER from phone 2, it sends a new INVITE to the > asterisk server. This INVITE includes a Replaces: header that tells > the receiver (asterisk) to replace an existing SIP dialog with the > new one. > > RFC 3891 "The SIP Replaces Header", Section 3 "UAS Behavior", defines: > > "the UA attempts to accept the new INVITE, reassign the user > interface and other resources of the matched dialog to the new > INVITE, and shut down the replaced dialog." > > But your SIP trace shows that asterisk doesn't shut down the > replaced dialog (by sending a BYE), which is the reason why phone 2 > does not get disconnected after hitting "transfer" the second time. > > > Instead of creating a new call park slot (702) when phone 1 sends > the Replaces: INVITE to asterisk, asterisk should be intelligent > enough to figure out that this INVITE actually replaces the > existing SIP dialog with phone 2. And asterisk should not create a > new park slot 702 but directly put phone 1 on hold at park slot 701 > and send a BYE to phone 2. > > Although asterisk supports the Replaces: header when used e.g. as a > gateway, I have some doubts that the call park/pickup > implementation does so too. Especially since it was designed to be > used in "PBX mode" where asterisk acts as B2BUA for all involved > call legs. > > Maybe this should be opened as a new feature/bug request on the > asterisk bug tracker. Or maybe there is a asterisk setting that > controls this behavior, I'm not really an asterisk expert myself ;-) > > -- >

17 years, 6 months

Re: [Serusers] FreeRadius brokes down during "Accounting Request"

by TZieleniewski

17 years, 6 months

[Users] Integration to Openser with Media Server

by Danilo

Hi all, I wasn't Openser is a SIP proxy. There is Media Server. It works together with OpenSER. The OpenSER is monitoring the flow of the messges. In case of this flow to be RTP, the Openser redirects for the Media Server. How does it work? Did you understand? thanks Danilo Inovax Engenharia de Sistemas Ltda. Rio de Janeiro - RJ / Brasil

17 years, 6 months

[Users] sl_send_reply with avp parameter

by Sigrid Thijs

Hi, I was wondering if it's possible to create an openser script to automatically send an error response when an INVITE request for a specific SIP URI is received. For example, an INVITE to "sip:e403@domain" would return a 403 response, and requests to "sip:eXYZ@domain.com" would return a XYZ response. I've tried using avp: # get username avp_printf ( "$avp(i:2)", "$oU" ); # get error code avp_subst ("$avp(i:2)", "/e*/\1/" ); # send reply sl_send_reply ( "$avp(i:2)", "Error" ); But apparently it's not allowed to pass an avp parameter to the sl_send_reply function. Is there another way to accomplish this? kind regards, Sigrid Thijs

17 years, 6 months

[Serusers] Digest Authentication in Ottendorf

by KUMAR

Thank you Michal, I have migrated to SER-2.0 and have compiled with HONOR_MADDR, but having some problem making it work. I cannot get the digest authentication working. I am using the following code for REGISTER, if (method=="REGISTER") { if(!www_authorize("","credentials")){ www_challenge("","0"); break; }; }; For some reason, www_challenge is not recognised. And gives parse error. Can anyone please tell me how can I get the digest authentication working?? kumar On 5/7/07, Michal Matyska <michal(a)iptel.org> wrote: > Hi, > > commetns inline > > On Po, 2007-05-07 at 10:04 +0545, KUMAR wrote: > > Hi Michal, > > Sorry for my late response. Here are the packets while the transport > > UDP is used. > > regards > > kumar > > > > On 5/4/07, Michal Matyska <michal(a)iptel.org> wrote: > > > Hi Kumar, > > > > > > could you please attach also the capture (at the server is enough) of > > > the UDP both way messages? There call flow is quite strange and not > > > understandable.... (well not surprised that's M$ RTC :) > > > > > > Some comments for now: > > > 1) it seems the CLIENT IS BROKEN and does not understand lr=on flag for > > > loose routing - see how is the ACK generated !!! You can try change rr > > > module parameter to put just lr into the record-route (this might > > > explain your rr and rr_preset difference) > > Taking back, the client code is not broken, it is obsoleted only ;-) > It uses strict router procedures (RFC2543), to create the Route header > and Request-URI in subsequent within-dialog requests, but SER's > loose_route function call should be able to escape form that (and it is, > the rewritten request uri shows that). If you want to check, you should > see "after_strict" message in your debug output. > > > > 2) M$ is used to misuse maddr, there is compile time flag HONOR_MADDR > > > which you should have set to route such requests taking maddr into > > > account > > This seems to be the main issue, the client does not put maddr into the > UDP requests. Check the Route header from the client in the TCP and UDP > captures to see the difference. > > Recompile SER with the option HONOR_MADDR set and it should work. If > not, please provide SER output with debug=4 statement in you ser.cfg, > while running the TCP usecase. > > Michal > > > > > On Pá, 2007-05-04 at 09:52 +0545, KUMAR wrote: > > > > Here are the packet captures. I was not quite sure whether I have to > > > > include packet captures from server or the UAs so i've included all of > > > > them. ua_A is sending INVITE to ua_B. > > > > thank you > > > > > > > > regards > > > > kumar > > > > > > > > On 5/3/07, Klaus Darilion <klaus.mailinglists(a)pernau.at> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jiri Kuthan wrote: > > > > > > actually I was suggesting SIP message dump (PCAP file) as opposed to log files. -jiri > > > > > > > > > > or ngrep dump: > > > > > > > > > > ngrep -t -W byline -d any port 5060 > > > > > > > > > > regards > > > > > klaus > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 13:10 03/05/2007, KUMAR wrote: > > > > > >> Here is the message dump that i get when using TCP as transport. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> On 5/3/07, Jiri Kuthan <jiri(a)iptel.org> wrote: > > > > > >>>> I think you would have to send message dumps first so that [serusers] volunteers > > > > > >>>> have material for providing an answer. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> -jiri > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> At 12:07 03/05/2007, KUMAR wrote: > > > > > >>>>> - > > > > > >>>>> Hi all, > > > > > >>>>> I already posted this message yet havent got any replies. I really > > > > > >>>>> need to find this out. > > > > > >>>>> Please anyone reply to this problem. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> I am using SER-0.9.6 and the problem i'm having is this. When using > > > > > >>>>> the following ser.cfg, it works well when the transport UDP is used. > > > > > >>>>> But when transport TCP is used, then it only results in one way IM, > > > > > >>>>> only from the UA from which the INVITE is being sent. Moreover, when > > > > > >>>>> record_route is used instead of record_route_preset, then even that > > > > > >>>>> one way IM doesn't work. But it works well with UDP. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Can anyone please point me as to where the problem might be?? > > > > > >>>>> Thank you in advance. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> kumar > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name=ser.cfg > > > > > >>>>> X-Attachment-Id: f_f18sg2bl > > > > > >>>>> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ser.cfg" > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > > >>>>> Serusers mailing list > > > > > >>>>> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org > > > > > >>>>> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> -- > > > > > >>>> Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/ > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Content-Type: audio/x-pn-realaudio-plugin; name="msg_dump.rar" > > > > > >> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="msg_dump.rar" > > > > > >> X-Attachment-Id: f_f1949112 > > > > > >> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > > >> Serusers mailing list > > > > > >> Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org > > > > > >> http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jiri Kuthan http://iptel.org/~jiri/ > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Serusers mailing list > > > > > > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org > > > > > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Serusers mailing list > > > > Serusers(a)lists.iptel.org > > > > http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers > > > > > > > >

17 years, 6 months

[Users] OpenSER-1.2.0 and SEMS

by raviprakash sunkara

Hello Users Todays onwards I'm Started integrating SEMS. Previously I'm using the Asterisk + openSER1.2 .For a small change , I shifted into the SEMS for voicemail By this url ( http://openser.org/pipermail/users/2005-September/000844.html) i found t_write_reg that is not in OpenSER tm modules , I found t_write_fifo/unix How I can do the voicemail or announcement with OpenSER + SEMS Any one give me ant hints Regardinng this points -- Thanks &Regards Ravi Prakash Sunkara

17 years, 6 months

[Users] Integration to openser with midia server

by Danilo

Hi all, I am using OpenSER 1.2.0. I am going to install media proxy, How does it work? How the Openser knows and obtains to monitor the flow and to set in motion the midia server? Danilo Inovax Engenharia de Sistemas Ltda. Rio de Janeiro - RJ / Brazil

17 years, 6 months

[Users] TLS configuration in Fedora Core 5

by Han Gu

Hi all, I am trying to configure my openSER with TLS support and get the following error message: May 7 15:44:39 tiger openser: WARNING:init_tls: disabling compression due ZLIB problems May 7 15:44:39 tiger openser: ERRRO:init_tls: null openssl compression methods Anyone could give me a hint of what is going wrong with my settings? Thank you so much for the help. Regards. Han

17 years, 6 months

[Users] Sending Voicemail to Asterisk

by Bill Neely

I am having a problem forwarding calls to asterisk for voice mail handling. What I am trying to do: When a call times out for no answer, change the address of the call by prepending 777 to the extension number. Then forward the call to asterisk, where the 777 prefix tells asterisk that it just sends this call to voicemail. Here is my openser.cfg file: ... modparam("tm", "fr_inv_timer", 20) ... route[1] { # # send it out now; use stateful forwarding as it works reliably # # even for UDP2TCP t_on_failure("2"); if (!t_relay()) { sl_reply_error(); }; exit; } failure_route[2] { if ( t_check_status("408")) if the call fails for timeout, send me a message and go to route(3) { xlog("L_ERR","rrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeecalling froute2 <$rm><$ru>\n"); route(3); exit; } exit; } route[3] { rewrite the uri to prepend 777 if (subst_uri('/^sip:([0-9]+)@(.*)$/sip:777\1@\2/i')) { rewritehostport("66.xxx.20.50:5060"); the asterisk box append_branch(); xlog("L_ERR","3333333333333333333333333333333333333333after substr <$rm><$ru>\n"); if (!t_relay("udp:66.xxx.20.50:5060")) { sl_send_reply("500", "Relaying failed"); } } exit; } What happens is that the call gets forwarded to Asterisk, but asterisk does not seem to recognize that the call is destined for 777xxxxxxx, but instead tries to send it to xxxxxxx, which causes the call to be transferred back to openser. This loop goes around and around until I kill it. Here is portion of log file: 1(7856) rrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeecalling froute2 <INVITE><sip:1020101@67.188.231.188:42749;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7> 1(7856) subst_run: running. r=0 1(7856) subst_run: matched (0, 59): [sip:1020101@67.188.231.188:42749;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7] 1(7856) textops: subst_uri_f: match - old uri= [sip:1020101@67.188.231.188:42749;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7], new uri= [sip:7771020101@67.188.231.188:42749;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7] 1(7856) ******* setting for branch 0 flags 0 1(7856) 3333333333333333333333333333333333333333after substr <INVITE><sip:7771020101@66.224.20.50:5060;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7> 1(7856) check_via_address(67.188.231.188, 67.188.231.188, 0) 1(7856) DBG:check_against_rule_list: using list dns 1(7856) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 500000 1(7856) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[4]: 0x801f4b4b0 (49500000) 1(7856) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 30 1(7856) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[0]: 0x801f4b4e0 (79) 1(7856) DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=0, save=1, relay=-1 1(7856) DEBUG:tm:build_local: using FROM=<From: "Xantek"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=045b4172 >, TO=<To: "1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3> >, CSEQ_N=<CSeq: 1> 1(7856) DEBUG: cancel_branch: sending cancel... 1(7856) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 500000 1(7856) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[4]: 0x801f4b3c0 (49500000) 1(7856) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 30 1(7856) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[0]: 0x801f4b3f0 (79) 1(7856) DEBUG: final_response_handler : done 0(7855) udp_rcv_loop: probing packet received from 24.5.58.18 53652 0(7855) SIP Reply (status): 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) status: <407> 0(7855) reason: <Proxy Authentication Required> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK5988.480944e.1>; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 234, <received> = <67.102.229.3>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) DEBUG:forward_reply: found module tm, passing reply to it 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: start=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=22 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK-d87543-e004ef19dd229e0e-1--d87543->; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 235, <rport> = <42749>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=22 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the second via 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=as499a9c72 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [52]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>] 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1> <INVITE> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=8 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: hash 34965 label 239374468 branch 1 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:REF_UNSAFE: after is 1 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: reply matched (T=0x801f4b0d8)! 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: end=0x801f4b0d8 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:reply_received: org. status uas=180, uac[1]=0 local=0 is_invite=1) 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=8 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:build_local: using FROM=<From: "Xantek"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=045b4172 >, TO=<To: "1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=as499a9c72 >, CSEQ_N=<CSeq: 1> 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:t_should_relay_response: T_code=180, new_code=407 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:t_pick_branch: picked branch 1, code 407 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=1, save=0, relay=1 0(7855) old size: 631, new size: 549 0(7855) build_res_from_sip_res: copied size: orig:125, new: 43, rest: 506 msg= SIP/2.0 407 Proxy Authentication Required Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 67.188.231.188:42749;branch=z9hG4bK-d87543-e004ef19dd229e0e-1--d87543-;rport=42749 From: "Xantek"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=045b4172 To: "1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=as499a9c72 Call-ID: YjgxM2RlZmM4MjRhMDYxN2YwYjI2MDdmZWZjMGY4NTY. CSeq: 1 INVITE User-Agent: Asterisk PBX Allow: INVITE, ACK, CANCEL, OPTIONS, BYE, REFER, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY Contact: <sip:7771020101@66.224.20.50> Proxy-Authenticate: Digest realm="sip.xantek.cc", nonce="1aebadb3" Content-Length: 0 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 500000 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[4]: 0x801f4b220 (49500000) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 30 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[0]: 0x801f4b250 (79) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: sent buf=0x62deb0: SIP/2.0 4..., shmem=0x801f4aea0: SIP/2.0 4 0(7855) DEBUG: cleanup_uac_timers: RETR/FR timers reset 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(7855) SIP Reply (status): 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) status: <200> 0(7855) reason: <OK> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK5988.480944e.0>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) DEBUG:forward_reply: found module tm, passing reply to it 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: start=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=22 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=03422a48 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [50]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>] 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1> <CANCEL> 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: hash 34965 label 239374468 branch 0 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:REF_UNSAFE: after is 1 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: reply matched (T=0x801f4b0d8)! 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: end=0x801f4b0d8 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:reply_received: org. status uas=407, uac[0]=408 local=0 is_invite=1) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:reply_received: reply to local CANCEL processed 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(7855) SIP Reply (status): 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) status: <487> 0(7855) reason: <Request Terminated> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK5988.480944e.0>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) DEBUG:forward_reply: found module tm, passing reply to it 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: start=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=22 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK-d87543-e004ef19dd229e0e-1--d87543->; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 235, <rport> = <42749>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=22 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the second via 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=03422a48 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [50]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>] 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1> <INVITE> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=8 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: hash 34965 label 239374468 branch 0 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:REF_UNSAFE: after is 1 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: reply matched (T=0x801f4b0d8)! 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: end=0x801f4b0d8 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:reply_received: org. status uas=407, uac[0]=408 local=0 is_invite=1) 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=8 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:build_local: using FROM=<From: "Xantek"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=045b4172 >, TO=<To: "1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=03422a48 >, CSEQ_N=<CSeq: 1> 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:t_should_relay_response: T_code=407, new_code=487 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=0, save=0, relay=-1 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(7855) SIP Request: 0(7855) method: <ACK> 0(7855) uri: <sip:1020101@67.102.229.3> 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK-d87543-e004ef19dd229e0e-1--d87543->; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 235, <rport> = <n/a>; state=17 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(7855) DEBUG : sl_filter_ACK: to late to be a local ACK! 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=100 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=as499a9c72 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [52]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>] 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1> <ACK> 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=0 0(7855) found end of header 0(7855) DEBUG: is_maxfwd_present: max_forwards header not found! 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=045b4172 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"Xantek"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=200 0(7855) find_first_route: No Route headers found 0(7855) loose_route: There is no Route HF 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) lookup(): '1020101' Not found in usrloc 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) rewrite_uri: Rewriting Request-URI with 'sip:1020101@67.188.231.188:42749;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7' 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) DEBUG: t_newtran: T on entrance=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=78 0(7855) t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=34965, isACK=1 0(7855) DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matched, tid=-d87543-e004ef19dd229e0e-1--d87543- 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:REF_UNSAFE: after is 1 0(7855) DEBUG: t_lookup_request: transaction found (T=0x801f4b0d8) 0(7855) DEBUG: cleanup_uac_timers: RETR/FR timers reset 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[2]: 0x801f4b158 (54) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(7855) SIP Request: 0(7855) method: <INVITE> 0(7855) uri: <sip:1020101@67.102.229.3> 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543->; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 235, <rport> = <n/a>; state=17 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=100 0(7855) DEBUG:maxfwd:is_maxfwd_present: value = 70 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=10 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=10 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [37]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3> ] 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=045b4172 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"Xantek"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=200 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <2> <INVITE> 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=476 0(7855) found end of header 0(7855) find_first_route: No Route headers found 0(7855) loose_route: There is no Route HF 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) lookup(): '1020101' Not found in usrloc 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) rewrite_uri: Rewriting Request-URI with 'sip:1020101@67.188.231.188:42749;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7' 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) DEBUG: t_newtran: T on entrance=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=78 0(7855) t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=34962, isACK=0 0(7855) DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matching failed 0(7855) DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no transaction found 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) check_via_address(67.188.231.188, 67.188.231.188, 0) 0(7855) WARNING:vqm_resize: resize(0) called 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:_reply_light: reply sent out. buf=0x62dcf8: SIP/2.0 1..., shmem=0x801f4e420: SIP/2.0 1 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:_reply_light: finished 0(7855) DEBUG: mk_proxy: doing DNS lookup... 0(7855) check_via_address(67.188.231.188, 67.188.231.188, 0) 0(7855) DBG:check_against_rule_list: using list dns 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 500000 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[4]: 0x801f550c8 (49600000) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 30 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[0]: 0x801f550f8 (79) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:t_relay_to: new transaction fwd'ed 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 1(7856) DEBUG: timer routine:4,tl=0x801f4b4b0 next=0x801f4b3c0, timeout=49500000 1(7856) DEBUG: timer routine:4,tl=0x801f4b3c0 next=0x801f4b220, timeout=49500000 1(7856) DEBUG: timer routine:4,tl=0x801f4b220 next=0x0, timeout=49500000 0(7855) SIP Reply (status): 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) status: <180> 0(7855) reason: <Ringing> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK2988.3de53f62.0>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) DEBUG:forward_reply: found module tm, passing reply to it 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: start=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=22 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543->; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 235, <rport> = <42749>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=22 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the second via 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=2a63bc63 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [50]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>] 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <2> <INVITE> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=8 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: hash 34962 label 653483731 branch 0 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:REF_UNSAFE: after is 1 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: reply matched (T=0x801f54ea8)! 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: end=0x801f54ea8 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:reply_received: org. status uas=100, uac[0]=0 local=0 is_invite=1) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:t_should_relay_response: T_code=100, new_code=180 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=0, save=0, relay=0 0(7855) old size: 554, new size: 493 0(7855) build_res_from_sip_res: copied size: orig:82, new: 21, rest: 472 msg= SIP/2.0 180 Ringing Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 67.188.231.188:42749;branch=z9hG4bK-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543-;rport=42749 Record-Route: <sip:67.102.229.3;lr;ftag=045b4172> Contact: <sip:1020101@67.188.231.188:42749;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7> To: "1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=2a63bc63 From: "Xantek"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=045b4172 Call-ID: YjgxM2RlZmM4MjRhMDYxN2YwYjI2MDdmZWZjMGY4NTY. CSeq: 2 INVITE User-Agent: eyeBeam release 1009l stamp 37966 Content-Length: 0 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: sent buf=0x62d678: SIP/2.0 1..., shmem=0x801f4e420: SIP/2.0 1 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 20 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[1]: 0x801f550f8 (69) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 1(7856) DEBUG: timer routine:4,tl=0x801f550c8 next=0x0, timeout=49600000 0(7855) SIP Request: 0(7855) method: <CANCEL> 0(7855) uri: <sip:1020101@67.102.229.3> 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543->; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 235, <rport> = <n/a>; state=17 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=100 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=10 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [37]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3> ] 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <2> <CANCEL> 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=0 0(7855) found end of header 0(7855) DEBUG: is_maxfwd_present: max_forwards header not found! 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=045b4172 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"Xantek"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=200 0(7855) find_first_route: No Route headers found 0(7855) loose_route: There is no Route HF 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) lookup(): '1020101' Not found in usrloc 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) rewrite_uri: Rewriting Request-URI with 'sip:1020101@67.188.231.188:42749;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7' 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) DEBUG: t_newtran: T on entrance=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=78 0(7855) t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=34962, isACK=0 0(7855) DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matching failed 0(7855) DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no transaction found 0(7855) DEBUG: t_lookupOriginalT: searching on hash entry 34962 0(7855) DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matched, tid=-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543- 0(7855) DEBUG: t_lookupOriginalT: canceled transaction found (0x801f54ea8)! 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:REF_UNSAFE: after is 1 0(7855) DEBUG: t_lookupOriginalT completed 0(7855) check_via_address(67.188.231.188, 67.188.231.188, 0) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 500000 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[4]: 0x801f583f8 (50600000) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 30 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[0]: 0x801f58428 (80) 0(7855) DEBUG: e2e_cancel: e2e cancel proceeding 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) check_via_address(67.188.231.188, 67.188.231.188, 0) 0(7855) WARNING:vqm_resize: resize(0) called 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:_reply_light: reply sent out. buf=0x62dcf8: SIP/2.0 2..., shmem=0x801f57da0: SIP/2.0 2 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:_reply_light: finished 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:t_relay_to: new transaction fwd'ed 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(7855) SIP Reply (status): 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) status: <200> 0(7855) reason: <OK> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK2988.3de53f62.0>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) DEBUG:forward_reply: found module tm, passing reply to it 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: start=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=22 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543->; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 235, <rport> = <42749>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=22 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the second via 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=2a63bc63 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [50]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>] 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <2> <CANCEL> 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: hash 34962 label 653483731 branch 0 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:REF_UNSAFE: after is 1 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: reply matched (T=0x801f581d8)! 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: end=0x801f581d8 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:reply_received: org. status uas=200, uac[0]=0 local=0 is_invite=0) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:t_should_relay_response: T_code=200, new_code=200 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=0, save=0, relay=-1 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[2]: 0x801f58258 (55) 0(7855) DEBUG: cleanup_uac_timers: RETR/FR timers reset 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(7855) SIP Reply (status): 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) status: <487> 0(7855) reason: <Request Terminated> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK2988.3de53f62.0>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) DEBUG:forward_reply: found module tm, passing reply to it 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: start=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=22 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543->; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 235, <rport> = <42749>; state=16 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=22 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the second via 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=2a63bc63 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [50]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>] 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <2> <INVITE> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=8 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: hash 34962 label 653483731 branch 0 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:REF_UNSAFE: after is 1 0(7855) DEBUG: t_reply_matching: reply matched (T=0x801f54ea8)! 0(7855) DEBUG: t_check: end=0x801f54ea8 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:reply_received: org. status uas=180, uac[0]=180 local=0 is_invite=1) 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=8 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:build_local: using FROM=<From: "Xantek"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=045b4172 >, TO=<To: "1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=2a63bc63 >, CSEQ_N=<CSeq: 2> 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:t_should_relay_response: T_code=180, new_code=487 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:t_pick_branch: picked branch 0, code 487 0(7855) DEBUG:t_check_status: checked status is <487> 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: branch=0, save=0, relay=0 0(7855) old size: 442, new size: 381 0(7855) build_res_from_sip_res: copied size: orig:93, new: 32, rest: 349 msg= SIP/2.0 487 Request Terminated Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 67.188.231.188:42749;branch=z9hG4bK-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543-;rport=42749 To: "1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=2a63bc63 From: "Xantek"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>;tag=045b4172 Call-ID: YjgxM2RlZmM4MjRhMDYxN2YwYjI2MDdmZWZjMGY4NTY. CSeq: 2 INVITE User-Agent: eyeBeam release 1009l stamp 37966 Content-Length: 0 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 500000 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[4]: 0x801f54ff0 (50700000) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:set_timer: relative timeout is 30 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[0]: 0x801f55020 (80) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:relay_reply: sent buf=0x62dcf8: SIP/2.0 4..., shmem=0x801f546f8: SIP/2.0 4 0(7855) DEBUG: cleanup_uac_timers: RETR/FR timers reset 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 0(7855) SIP Request: 0(7855) method: <ACK> 0(7855) uri: <sip:1020101@67.102.229.3> 0(7855) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=2 0(7855) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543->; state=6 0(7855) Found param type 235, <rport> = <n/a>; state=17 0(7855) end of header reached, state=5 0(7855) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(7855) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(7855) After parse_msg... 0(7855) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(7855) DEBUG : sl_filter_ACK: to late to be a local ACK! 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=100 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=2a63bc63 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"1020101"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [50]; uri=[sip:1020101@67.102.229.3] 0(7855) DEBUG: to body ["1020101"<sip:1020101@67.102.229.3>] 0(7855) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <2> <ACK> 0(7855) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=0 0(7855) found end of header 0(7855) DEBUG: is_maxfwd_present: max_forwards header not found! 0(7855) DEBUG: add_param: tag=045b4172 0(7855) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(7855) DBUG:parse_to: display={"Xantek"}, ruri={sip:1020101@67.102.229.3} 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=200 0(7855) find_first_route: No Route headers found 0(7855) loose_route: There is no Route HF 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) lookup(): '1020101' Not found in usrloc 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [67.102.229.3] == [67.102.229.3] 0(7855) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(7855) rewrite_uri: Rewriting Request-URI with 'sip:1020101@67.188.231.188:42749;rinstance=1e89b57f830c50f7' 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) DEBUG: t_newtran: T on entrance=0xffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(7855) parse_headers: flags=78 0(7855) t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=34962, isACK=1 0(7855) DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matched, tid=-d87543-c535a22e8d568d14-1--d87543- 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:REF_UNSAFE: after is 1 0(7855) DEBUG: t_lookup_request: transaction found (T=0x801f54ea8) 0(7855) DEBUG: cleanup_uac_timers: RETR/FR timers reset 0(7855) DEBUG: add_to_tail_of_timer[2]: 0x801f54f28 (55) 0(7855) DEBUG:tm:UNREF_UNSAFE: after is 0 0(7855) DEBUG:destroy_avp_list: destroying list 0x0 0(7855) receive_msg: cleaning up 1(7856) DEBUG: timer routine:4,tl=0x801f583f8 next=0x0, timeout=50600000 1(7856) DEBUG: timer routine:4,tl=0x801f54ff0 next=0x0, timeout=50700000 ^C 0(7855) INT received, program terminates 0(7855) INFO: signal 2 received 0(7855) Memory status (pkg): 0(7855) fm_status (0x615be0): 0(7855) heap size= 1048576 0(7855) used= 56472, used+overhead=95544, free=953032 0(7855) max used (+overhead)= 95544 Anybody see what I an doing wrong? -- Bill Neely Xantek, Inc. 1-866-553-3833 1-702-874-3833

17 years, 6 months

[Users] How to get the most stable 1.2.x release sources?

by Anatoly Pidruchny

Hi, all, I could not find a good explanation of the releasing policy for OpenSER. I mean, 1.2.0 was released on March 12, 2007. I know that the future release is 1.3.0. But is there going to be 1.2.1 ever released? There were many bugs fixed in 1.2.x since 1.2.0 was released. I think I read a developer's reply that the best and most stable OpenSER 1.2.x release sources can only be downloaded from the SVN 1.2 branch. Is this true? And what is the trunk version in SVN? Is it only for the next release (1.3.0) and changes to the trunk do not go to 1.2.x branch automatically? The download page (http://www.openser.org/mos/view/Download/) unfortunately does not tell that to get the most stable 1.2.x release one has to use SVN Download. I think most of the OpenSER users just download the released 1.2.0 sources. By the way, looks like the so called "daily" SVN snapshots have not been posted since April 23. Is this a known problem? Thanks, Anatoly.

17 years, 6 months

← Newer
1
...
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
...
30
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 May 2007