sr-users January 2013

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

82 participants
126 discussions

by Spencer Thomason

Hello, I'm forwarding registrations to Freeswitch and adding a Path header using add_path_received() for endpoints behind NAT. When TCP is used, this results in a header like this: Path: <sip:a.a.a.a:5070;lr;received="sip:b.b.b.b:35430;transport=tcp"> Freeswitch doesn't like the transport protocol inside the quotations and refuses to route a call to the registered user. Constructing the header manually without the quotes such as: append_hf("Path: <sip:$Ri:$Rp;lr;received=sip:$si:$sp;transport=$pr>\r\n"); solves the problem. Is there a reason for the quotes? Best Regards, Spencer

11 years, 10 months

Multi tenant Kamailio

by Rumen Mihailov

Hello Kamailio, VoIP and asterisk gurus, I have the following really complicated scenario to solve. I have CompanyA which has extensions 100-120 I have CompanyB which has extensions 100-115 I have CompanyC which has extensions 100-130 Now I want to have all those extensions on a single kamailio box, but I want to achieve the following. CompanyA calls 110 and this rings CompanyA 110 not CompanyB or CompanyC. What I want to achive is multitenancy. I know how to make this in asterisk but I want to take advantage of Kamailio's load balancing and HA features. Sammy from the mailing lists advised that I use multidomain and actually I saw that this module is indeed intended to do that, however I have no clue how to use it. I mean do I have to setup a domain for all the companies ? For instance companya.itradebg.com, companyb.itradebg.com and then advise the customers to register to their respective domain or what ? This concept is really a bit tough for me despite all the help from Sammy for which I am really greatful. I would greatly appreciate any tutorials or links to some useful documentation apart from the module documentation. Thank you in advance guys. Best regards, Rumen http://itradebg.com

11 years, 10 months

NAT'ed RLS setup

by Dmytro Bogovych

Greetings. I have kamailio 3.3.3 setup on server behind the nat. Nat forwards ports for tls/tcp/udp. This setup worked without rls ok. I added necessary modules - rls, pua, xcap etc. Updated a config file and db. Client application uploads xcap documents ok; after app sends subscribe request to list address. Rls/pua modules generate subscriptions to entries in list. But dns resolver finds the public ip as target for subscription. The result is: sip packets cannot reach the server - they are sent to public ip of nat machine. I see it in ngrep output. Nat does not route them back. I add the domain name and _sip._udp.domain with internal ip address to /etc/hosts. But kamailio does not use /etc/hosts when dns caching is active. I do not want to loose dns caching. I made an attempt to run without caching but server was not stable. It crashed couple of times - so i stopped these attempts. Is there way to put eternal domain -> ip bindings into dns cache? I want to put bingings to internal ip - hope it will help. Maybe there is another way to handle this problem?

11 years, 10 months

Timeout for t_uac_dlg per request

by David

Hello, I am running Kamailio 3.2.x, I am using udp mi to send a t_uac_dlg command, :t_uac_dlg: NOTIFY sip:phone1@proxy.lan . . "From:sip:daemon@proxy.lan To:<sip:phone1@proxy.lan> Contact:sip:daemon@proxy.lan" # I would like to know if I can change the timeout for this request. Running a packet sniffer on the proxy, I see the packet is retransmitted after 500ms, then 1000ms, then 2000ms, etc... This is the proper behaviour for SIP, so we can see my tm module is working well. My problem is that I want a response within 3 seconds ( I know this doesn't respect the normal SIP timer values ). I do not want to change the timers in the tm module for the entire proxy, so my question is if there is a way to set the timeout for the dialog created by the t_uac_dlg command, and can I set it on a per dialog basis ? David

11 years, 10 months

TLS with self-singned certificates

by Iurii Andamasov

Hello, trying setup kamailio with TLS, have 2 peers, tls.cfg: http://pastebin.com/DvdDzx0v i'm getting Jan 4 10:38:43 fs-tls /usr/sbin/kamailio[3798]: ERROR: tls [tls_server.c:1190]: TLS read:error:14094410:SSL routines:SSL3_READ_BYTES:sslv3 alert handshake failure Can someone point me to solution? Thanks

11 years, 10 months

tls_domain.h:37: fatal error: openssl/ssl.h: No such file or directory

by Shreyansh Purwar

Hello Everyone, While building kamailio server 3.0.0 with TLS(I have removed tls from exclude module variable) I am getting following error :- - tls_domain.h:37: fatal error: openssl/ssl.h: No such file or directory Please help me how to resolve this issue. Thanks in anticipation. -- Best Regards Shreyansh Purwar

11 years, 10 months

Malicious traffic comming from 37.75.210.90

by Nick Khamis

Hello Osama, and Hisham, At 1330GMT there was some malicious activity coming from your network IP 37.75.210.90. Please act accordingly. Things that may be of use "972599779558" N.

11 years, 10 months

dialog ka_timer and ka_interval problem

by Rinor Hoxha

Hi, I had an issue with dialog module of kamailio v3.3.3. Is the same described on http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/2012-November/075735.html. I think the issue is related to dgl_hash.c on line:192 *dlg_ka_list_head = NULL; should be *dlg_ka_list_tail = NULL; and line:216 *dlg_ka_list_tail = dka; should be *dlg_ka_list_head = dka;. I will test it as soon as I can, but meanwhile I'm attaching the patch that should fix it so you can test it and report back the results if you want to. Br, Rinor

11 years, 10 months

Kamailio DB version error

by Douglas Ugalde

Hi, I want to load the "dialplan.so" with parameters but when I reload kamailio, I got this error: /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[1348]: ERROR: <core> [db.c:439]: invalid version 0 for table my_table found, expected 1 (check table structure and table "version") Im using kamailio 3.3.3 Please what can I do to resolve it? Regards.

11 years, 10 months

Next major release proposed as v4.0.0

by Daniel-Constantin Mierla

Hello, using v4.0.0 for the next major release was proposed and debated at previous development IRC meeting. First was about the addition of a new transport layer (websockets) along with other important new features. During the debate was touched the completion of kamailio-ser integration (no more duplicated modules) as another milestone for increasing the first digit (which was finished just before the end of last year). Now we also have the IMS modules, pushed in the GIT master branch few days ago. It seems that there are lot of good reasons for numbering the next major version 4.0.0. Other comments, opinions? Have a great and happy year ahead, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

11 years, 10 months

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

sr-users January 2013