sr-users August 2007

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

169 participants
287 discussions

[Serusers] Performance counters
by Parminder.Nayyar＠relianceada.com 04 Aug '07

04 Aug '07

Hi all Anyone here has any idea as to how we can keep the performance counters - ie the number of INVITEz recieved, the number of successfull responses to INVITE rcvd n so on... so that a performance metric cud be calculated as to how many calls got thru.. hwo many got thru voice, how many thru signalling only, n other such things??? Dint find ne module so far that cud help out in this... Has neone got ne idea?? Thanks... Parminder Nayyar

1 0

[Serusers] Problem with TM initialialization
by Fernando Schmitt 04 Aug '07

04 Aug '07

Guys, I'm receiving the following output when running ser: 0(5705) Aug 03 06:58:26 DEBUG: register_fifo_cmd: new command (sl_stats) registered 0(5705) Aug 03 06:58:26 DEBUG: MD5 calculated: 103d8e7e9fc1a3538c1143a96b22bab4 0(5705) Aug 03 06:58:26 DEBUG: init_mod: tm 0(5705) Aug 03 06:58:26 TM - initializing... 0(5705) Aug 03 06:58:26 Call-ID initialization: '79dff3eb' 0(5705) Aug 03 06:58:26 DEBUG: register_fifo_cmd: new command (t_uac_dlg) registered 0(5705) Aug 03 06:58:26 DEBUG: register_fifo_cmd: new command (t_hash) registered 0(5705) Aug 03 06:58:26 DEBUG: lock_initialize: lock initialization started 0(5705) Aug 03 06:58:26 init_mod(): Error while initializing module tm ERROR: error while initializing modules Do you know why? Thanks!

1 0

Re: [OpenSER-Users] MediaProxy 2.0 roadmap
by Alexandre dos Reis Ferreira 03 Aug '07

03 Aug '07

Hi Adrian, I'd like a feature which allow get in real time the MOS of each call in the media sessions interface. Regards, Areis. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.2/933 - Release Date: 2/8/2007 14:22

1 0

[OpenSER-Users] openser+asterisk question
by Radu Spineanu 03 Aug '07

03 Aug '07

Hi, When deploying a multi-location openser+asterisk architecture what is the best way of storing the user accounts? I thought about separating each location with a different prefix and having a mysql DB for each one. Then tell openser to route according to the prefixes. I like this version because it means if one location fails it still works locally. And the other servers are not affected. But this brings a problem with centralizing CDR. And if I want to interconnect with other VoIP networks I would have to pick a central location, right? Thanks, Radu Spineanu

1 0

[OpenSER-Users] Adding an attribute to SDP
by Kuddusi 03 Aug '07

03 Aug '07

Hi, How can I add a header to SDP? Actually what I want to do is, whenever an INVITE with SDP comes, search for a ptime and if ptime can not be found, add a default line to SDP body. Like if (has_body()){ if (!search_body("ptime") { # like below à # append_body("a=ptime:20"); } } Thanks, Kuddusi CIFTCIBASI Next Generation Networks Teletek Telecommunication Services Corp. Ayazma Dere Cad. Aksit Plaza No:12/1 Fulya, Besiktas , 34349, www.teletek.net Tel : +90 212 227 7030 Direkt: +90 212 310 2233 Fax : +90 212 227 8700 Email: kuddusi.ciftcibasi(a)teletek.net Skype : realkudu MSN : kuddusic(a)hotmail.com Yahoo: kuddusi.

2 3

[OpenSER-Users] error loading presence_xml module
by Babon Frederic 03 Aug '07

03 Aug '07

Hello, I have a problem when i try to add "presence_xml" module : ERROR : load_module: could not open module (/lib/openser/modules/presence_xml.so) : /lib/openser/modules/presence_xml.so : undefined symbol : add_event Do you have any idea about this error? Here is an extract of my openser configuration file: loadmodule "sl.so" loadmodule "tm.so" loadmodule "rr.so" loadmodule "presence.so" loadmodule "presence_xml.so" loadmodule "maxfwd.so" loadmodule "usrloc.so" loadmodule "registrar.so" loadmodule "textops.so" loadmodule "mi_fifo.so" # -- presence params -- modparam("presence", "db_url", "mysql://openser:openserrw@localhost/openser") modparam("presence_xml", "db_url", "mysql://openser:openserrw@localhost/openser") modparam("presence", "presentity_table", "presentity") modparam("presence", "active_watchers_table", "active_watchers") modparam("presence", "watchers_table", "watchers") modparam("presence_xml", "xcap_table", "xcaps") modparam("presence", "clean_period", 100) modparam("presence", "to_tag_pref", 'a') #modparam("presence", "lock_set_size", 8) modparam("presence", "expires_offset", 10) modparam("presence_xml", "force_active", 1) modparam("presence", "max_expires", 3600) modparam("presence", "server_address", "sip:localhost:5065") modparam("presence_xml", "pidf_manipulation", 1) Thanks for your help. Frederic.

2 1

[Serusers] loose_route() - loose_route: no routing target is local??
by tzieleniewski 03 Aug '07

03 Aug '07

Hi, When I invoke the loose_route() function I get the following info: loose_route: no routing target is local Even though the message contains the Route header fields the functions returns false. Please point me what do I miss here?? Thanks in advance. Cheers Tomasz

1 0

[OpenSER-Users] STUN working!!
by Marc LEURENT 03 Aug '07

03 Aug '07

Hello everybody, To remind you, I'm trying to set a SIP architecture for NATTED SIP users without using any rtp proxy (because of lack of ressource). STUN is working very well between 2 users in 2 differents NATs. But when they are behing the same NAT, they cannot reach the other.. In the INVITE and 200Ok SDP fields, they have put their public address with a port reserved with STUN: it's not working! I think that it is because it's difficult for them to reach the public IPaddress/port where they should send the RTP stream from inside the NAT. So my idea was: Why not rewriting SDP fields to put their private address when they are behind the same NAT But I don't know how to rewrite the SDP fields for both users. (I have the private address of both users in the location database) Help would be very grateful... If you have any idea! Best Regards

4 8

[OpenSER-Users] Not possible variables or AVP's in alias_db_lookup() ?
by Iñaki Baz Castillo 03 Aug '07

03 Aug '07

I want OpenSer to dinamically look for alias in a table for each domain, so I've in my database tables with name as: dbaliases_sip1_domain_org dbaliases_sip2_domain_com dbaliases_sip3_domain_net And I do (thanks to Andreas Granig): $avp(s:dom) = $rd; avp_subst("$avp(s:dom)", "/\./_/g"); alias_db_lookup("dbaliases_" + $avp(s:dominio)); but it fails because the SQL query is literally: select username,domain from dbaliases_$avp(s:dominio) where ... I've tryed putting variables and more things into the function parameter, but it's never processed and the SQL query is always done literally. I use OpenSer 1.2.1. What can I do for solving this? Thanks. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo ibc(a)in.ilimit.es

2 8

Re: [OpenSER-Users] NAT + STUN
by Marc LEURENT 03 Aug '07

03 Aug '07

Do you have any idea to solve this matter: In the BYE request: 0(2569) found end of header 0(2569) find_next_route: No next Route HF found 0(2569) after_loose: No next URI found So the BYE message is not forwarded by openser Please find below INVITE and BYE requests 0(2632) SIP Request: 0(2632) method: <INVITE> 0(2632) uri: <sip:103@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060> 0(2632) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(2632) parse_headers: flags=2 0(2632) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK4747925369759203710>; state=16 0(2632) end of header reached, state=5 0(2632) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(2632) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(2632) After parse_msg... 0(2632) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(2632) parse_headers: flags=100 0(2632) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=10 0(2632) DBUG:parse_to: display={}, ruri={sip:103@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060;user=phone} 0(2632) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [46]; uri=[sip:103@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060;user=phone] 0(2632) DEBUG: to body [<sip:103@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060;user=phone> ] 0(2632) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1> <INVITE> 0(2632) DEBUG:maxfwd:is_maxfwd_present: value = 70 0(2632) DBG:maxfwd:process_maxfwd_header: value 70 decreased to 10 0(2632) ROUTE2: STARTING NAT DETECTION 0(2632) !!!!!!!!! NAT UAC TEST 19 SUCEDEED 0(2632) parse_headers: flags=80 0(2632) ROUTE2: SETFLAG 3 0(2632) DEBUG: add_param: tag=c0a80101-b67ff5 0(2632) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(2632) DBUG:parse_to: display={"101"}, ruri={sip:101@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060;user=phone} 0(2632) parse_headers: flags=200 0(2632) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=269 0(2632) found end of header 0(2632) find_first_route: No Route headers found 0(2632) loose_route: There is no Route HF 0(2632) DEBUG: has_totag: no totag 0(2632) I AM SETTING THE FLAGS FOR RADIUS 0(2632) SETTING FLAGS 1 & 2 FOR RADIUS 0(2632) CHECKING IF URI <> myself 0(2632) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 18==12 && [sd-7501.dedibox.fr] == [88.191.45.91] 0(2632) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(2632) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 18==12 && [sd-7501.dedibox.fr] == [88.191.45.91] 0(2632) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(2632) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 18==12 && [sd-7501.dedibox.fr] == [88.191.45.91] 0(2632) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(2632) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 18==12 && [sd-7501.dedibox.fr] == [88.191.45.91] 0(2632) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(2632) rewrite_uri: Rewriting Request-URI with 'sip:103@82.127.0.79:1028;user=phone' 0(2632) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(2632) STARTING ROUTE 1 0(2632) subst_run: running. r=1 0(2632) subst_str: no match 0(2632) FLAG 3 OK GOTO ROUTE 3 0(2632) !!!!!!!!! ON ROUTE 3 FOR NATTED CONTACT 0(2632) DEBUG: t_newtran: T on entrance=0xffffffff 0(2632) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(2632) parse_headers: flags=78 0(2632) t_lookup_request: start searching: hash=12532, isACK=0 0(2632) DEBUG: RFC3261 transaction matching failed 0(2632) DEBUG: t_lookup_request: no transaction found 0(2632) DBG: trans=0xb5c08fa8, callback type 1, id 1 entered 0(2632) trace_onreq_in: trace off... 0(2632) DBG: trans=0xb5c08fa8, callback type 1, id 0 entered 0(2632) parse_headers: flags=78 0(2632) DEBUG: noisy_timer set for accounting 0(2632) DEBUG:rr:is_direction: param ftag not found 0(2632) parse_headers: flags=ffffffffffffffff 0(2632) check_via_address(82.127.0.79, 82.127.0.79, 0) 0(2569) SIP Request: 0(2569) method: <BYE> 0(2569) uri: <sip:101@82.127.0.79:1312> 0(2569) version: <SIP/2.0> 0(2569) parse_headers: flags=2 0(2569) Found param type 232, <branch> = <z9hG4bK2074253192092946047>; state=16 0(2569) end of header reached, state=5 0(2569) parse_headers: Via found, flags=2 0(2569) parse_headers: this is the first via 0(2569) After parse_msg... 0(2569) preparing to run routing scripts... 0(2569) parse_headers: flags=100 0(2569) DEBUG: add_param: tag=c0a80101-b31387 0(2569) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(2569) DBUG:parse_to: display={}, ruri={sip:101@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060;user=phone} 0(2569) DEBUG: get_hdr_field: <To> [66]; uri=[sip:101@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060;user=phone] 0(2569) DEBUG: to body [<sip:101@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060;user=phone>] 0(2569) get_hdr_field: cseq <CSeq>: <1> <BYE> 0(2569) DEBUG:maxfwd:is_maxfwd_present: value = 70 0(2569) DBG:maxfwd:process_maxfwd_header: value 70 decreased to 10 0(2569) ROUTE2: STARTING NAT DETECTION 0(2569) !!!!!!!!! NAT UAC TEST 19 SUCEDEED 0(2569) parse_headers: flags=80 0(2569) DEBUG: get_hdr_body : content_length=0 0(2569) found end of header 0(2569) ROUTE2: SETFLAG 3 0(2569) DEBUG: add_param: tag=c0a80101-2376fc2 0(2569) DEBUG:parse_to:end of header reached, state=29 0(2569) DBUG:parse_to: display={}, ruri={sip:103@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060;user=phone} 0(2569) parse_headers: flags=200 0(2569) is_preloaded: No 0(2569) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==12 && [82.127.0.79] == [88.191.45.91] 0(2569) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 1312 0(2569) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 11==12 && [82.127.0.79] == [88.191.45.91] 0(2569) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 1312 0(2569) DEBUG:check_self: host != me 0(2569) grep_sock_info - checking if host==us: 12==12 && [88.191.45.91] == [88.191.45.91] 0(2569) grep_sock_info - checking if port 5060 matches port 5060 0(2569) after_loose: Topmost route URI: 'sip:88.191.45.91;lr=on;ftag=c0a80101-b31387' is me 0(2569) parse_headers: flags=200 0(2569) found end of header 0(2569) find_next_route: No next Route HF found 0(2569) after_loose: No next URI found 0(2569) DBG:rr:run_rr_callbacks: callback id 0 entered with <lr=on;ftag=c0a80101-b31387> Dan-Cristian Bogos a écrit : > That's because for INVITE your will take routing decisions but BYE u > will just proxy out. > > DanB > > On 8/2/07, Marc LEURENT <lftsy(a)free.fr> wrote: >> I've compared the INVITE and BYE method.... >> And the uri in the INVITE method is >> 0(2632) SIP Request: >> 0(2632) method: <INVITE> >> 0(2632) uri: <sip:103@sd-7501.dedibox.fr:5060> >> 0(2632) version: <SIP/2.0> >> >> whereas in the BYE method >> >> 0(2569) SIP Request: >> 0(2569) method: <BYE> >> 0(2569) uri: <sip:101@82.127.0.79:1312> >> 0(2569) version: <SIP/2.0> >> >> >> so the DEBUG:check_self: host != me >> I'm going to try without accoounting, but it should'nt change anything... >> >> Best Regards >> >> >> >> >> >>

2 4

Jump to page:

2025

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 August 2007