sr-users September 2020

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

84 participants
107 discussions

Via header force change protocol to TLS?
by Anthony Alba 30 May '24

30 May '24

I have kamailio behind a TLS termination proxy so the sockets are correctly deduced to be TCP. However the clients only talk TLS to the proxy and are confused when the top Via header added by Kamailio is TCP. Is there a way for Kamailio to forcibly pretend its protocol is TLS? Like advertised_address but "advertised_protocol" instead. (With pjsip testing: it has a flag use_tls which ignores TCP from Kamailio and continues to use the persistent TLS transport to proxy. Linphone fails because it tries to honor TCP in Via and is unable to establish TCP transport). BTW I am using t_relay_to_tcp so Kamailio will return traffic to the proxy as TCP even though the contact addresses specify transport=TLS.

4 10

Dialog and DMQ on restart
by Björn Klasen 25 Mar '24

25 Mar '24

Hi everybody, I'm just testing Kamailio 5.4.1 with dialog replication over DMQ. This seems to work very good. Dialogs are replicated without problems. When I'm restarting one node I would have expected, that all dialogs are synced again, just like in dmq_usrloc. But this does not happen. After a restart the nodes dialog-list is empty. Did I miss somethin? Is there a special parameter that I have to set? BR, Björn -- Björn Klasen, Specialist TNG Stadtnetz GmbH, Network Management (VoIP) Projensdorfer Straße 324 24106 Kiel Germany T +49 431/ 530530 F +49 431/ 7097-555 mailto: bklasen(a)tng.de http://www.tng.de Register: Amtsgericht Kiel HRB 6002 KI Executive board (Geschäftsführung): Dr.-Ing. Volkmar Hausberg, Sven Schade, Carsten Tolkmit, Dr. Sven Willert Tax-Id (Steuernr.): 2029047020, VAT-Id (USt-Id): DE225201428

4 9

Is Min-SE check broken?
by harneet singh 31 May '23

31 May '23

Hi All, I am facing an issue in understanding how the min_se should be working in kamailio. As per the SST documentation, it seems like if the min_se is configured as 500, then any value of Session-Expires OR MIN-SE if lower than 500, can be responded to by a 422. However, I strangely see the reverse happening. To investigate further, I looked in to the ki_sst_check_min() code in the master, and these seems like a potential issue. Ref Code: Inside ki_sst_check_min(), there is an if condition like below: if (sst_min_se < MIN(minse, se.interval)) { However, shouldn't it be the other way around? ie if (sst_min_se > MIN(minse, se.interval)) { because we need to send 422 if the received value(in INVITE etc) is smaller than the sst configure min_se value? I also found a different documentation, at https://git.sgu.ru/oldssu/ex-opensips/blob/cb9df8d59dbb254a9d862569fd5d11f6… where the check is as below? if (sst_min_se > MIN(minse, se.interval)) { Can someone confirm if this is broken, or my understanding is incorrect? Regards, Harneet -- "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth" - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

2 3

Re: [SR-Users] TOPOS (5.1.[23]) breaks PRACK
by Daniel Tryba 02 May '23

02 May '23

On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 04:44:14PM +0200, Daniel Tryba wrote: > Sure. Attached. Problem appears to be that the topos query can't find > callid-totag (from the response). > > I'll try the same scenario with the mysql backend to see if it behaves > different. Config works fine with mysql as topos backend. So the bug is restricted to topos-redis.

5 19

Re: [SR-Users] t_drop_replies not working with t_suspend in failure route
by Huber Andreas 03 Sep '21

03 Sep '21

Hi, We’re still using kamailio 4.4 but we’ll be migrating to 5.0 soon. Cool so it will be fixed when we migrate ! Thanks, Andreas From: sr-users [mailto:sr-users-bounces@lists.kamailio.org] On Behalf Of Federico Cabiddu Sent: vendredi 12 mai 2017 11:56 To: Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List Subject: Re: [SR-Users] t_drop_replies not working with t_suspend in failure route Hi, which version are you using? A similar case had been reported some months ago and it should be fixed in 5.0. Regards, Federico On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Huber Andreas <andreas.huber(a)nagra.com<mailto:andreas.huber@nagra.com>> wrote: Hello, We have a use case where we suspend a transaction in a failure_route to give UEs that might be woken by a push notification more time to REGISTER and join the INVITE. We’d like to drop the previous branches in this case. I tried using t_drop_replies() but it has no effect. The doc states that t_drop_replies() is only working if a new branch is added. And from my understanding t_suspend() adds a new branch. But is it possible that t_drop_replies() cannot be used with t_suspend()? Or am I missing something? Kind Regards, Andreas _______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List sr-users(a)lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-users@lists.kamailio.org> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users

2 1

kamailio-5.2.0 Crash - udp_send failed
by Hamid Hashmi 07 Dec '20

07 Dec '20

I am using "kamailio 5.2.0-dev6 (x86_64/linux) 48ed62-dirty" what could be the reason of the crash its usually crash with the following logs Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20771]: ERROR: <core> [core/udp_server.c:596]: udp_send(): sendto(sock,0x7f36eee8c560,418,0,10.100.227.202:5060,16): Invalid argument(22) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20771]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:601]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20771]: ERROR: tm [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20771]: WARNING: tm [t_reply.c:1581]: t_retransmit_reply(): send pr buffer failed Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20756]: ERROR: <core> [core/udp_server.c:596]: udp_send(): sendto(sock,0x7f36ef8eb948,358,0,10.100.177.91:5060,16): Invalid argument(22) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20756]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:601]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20756]: ERROR: sl [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20744]: ERROR: <core> [core/udp_server.c:596]: udp_send(): sendto(sock,0x7f36ef8b4a80,358,0,10.100.72.230:5060,16): Invalid argument(22) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20744]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:601]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20744]: ERROR: sl [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20783]: ERROR: <core> [core/udp_server.c:596]: udp_send(): sendto(sock,0x7f36ef8ac740,416,0,10.100.72.230:5060,16): Invalid argument(22) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20783]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:601]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20783]: ERROR: tm [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20752]: ERROR: <core> [core/udp_server.c:596]: udp_send(): sendto(sock,0x7f36ef8b5098,356,0,10.100.56.38:5060,16): Invalid argument(22) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20805]: ERROR: <core> [core/udp_server.c:596]: udp_send(): sendto(sock,0x7f36ef8e8f18,416,0,10.100.177.91:5060,16): Invalid argument(22) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20805]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:601]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20805]: ERROR: tm [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20752]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:601]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20752]: ERROR: sl [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20777]: ERROR: <script>: Re-Transmit: REGISTER (sip:410060269353579@ims.mnc006.mcc410.3gppnetwork.org (10.100.236.57:5060) to sip:410060269353579@ims.mnc006.mcc410.3gppnetwork.org, 1SDq5cuY3iDYFKLATTp) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20761]: ERROR: <core> [core/udp_server.c:596]: udp_send(): sendto(sock,0x7f36ef8e8a08,354,0,10.100.2.76:5060,16): Invalid argument(22) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20761]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:601]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20761]: ERROR: sl [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20767]: ERROR: <core> [core/udp_server.c:596]: udp_send(): sendto(sock,0x7f36ef8ad100,360,0,10.100.144.137:5060,16): Invalid argument(22) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20767]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:601]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20767]: ERROR: sl [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20777]: ERROR: <core> [core/udp_server.c:596]: udp_send(): sendto(sock,0x7f36ef8eb860,360,0,10.100.140.226:5060,16): Invalid argument(22) Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20777]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/udp_server.c:601]: udp_send(): invalid sendtoparameters#012one possible reason is the server is bound to localhost and#012attempts to send to the net Sep 25 16:58:41 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20777]: ERROR: sl [../../core/forward.h:219]: msg_send_buffer(): udp_send failed Sep 25 16:58:43 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20861]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/pass_fd.c:277]: receive_fd(): EOF on 77 Sep 25 16:58:44 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20853]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:301]: tcp_read_data(): error reading: Connection timed out (110) ([10.100.64.49]:32888 -> Sep 25 16:58:44 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20853]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:302]: tcp_read_data(): -> [10.161.224.228]:5060) Sep 25 16:58:44 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20853]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:1485]: tcp_read_req(): ERROR: tcp_read_req: error reading - c: 0x7f36a739fe78 r: 0x7f36a739fef8 Sep 25 16:58:44 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20742]: ALERT: <core> [main.c:748]: handle_sigs(): child process 20815 exited by a signal 11 Sep 25 16:58:44 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20742]: ALERT: <core> [main.c:751]: handle_sigs(): core was generated Sep 25 16:58:44 pcscf kernel: [52607827.581845] net_ratelimit: 16 callbacks suppressed Sep 25 16:58:44 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20742]: CRITICAL: cdp [diameter_peer.c:423]: diameter_peer_destroy(): destroy_diameter_peer(): Bye Bye from C Diameter Peer test Sep 25 16:59:01 pcscf CRON[24805]: (root) CMD (/bin/bash /root/volumes/monitoring/src/services_status.sh -p http://10.161.224.25:9091 -s kamailio_pcscf,sems -n pcscf) Sep 25 16:59:01 pcscf CRON[24804]: (CRON) info (No MTA installed, discarding output) Sep 25 16:59:44 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][20742]: CRITICAL: <core> [main.c:654]: sig_alarm_abort(): shutdown timeout triggered, dying... but last time its also crashed with the following logs as well Sep 25 18:39:59 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][28015]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:301]: tcp_read_data(): error reading: Connection timed out (110) ([10.100.183.34]:39022 -> Sep 25 18:39:59 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][28015]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:302]: tcp_read_data(): -> [10.161.224.228]:5060) Sep 25 18:39:59 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][28015]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:1485]: tcp_read_req(): ERROR: tcp_read_req: error reading - c: 0x7f92ca8d0150 r: 0x7f92ca8d01d0 Sep 25 18:39:59 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][28010]: ERROR: cdp [authstatemachine.c:404]: auth_client_statefull_sm_process(): auth_client_statefull_sm_process(): Received invalid event 6 while in state Open! Sep 25 18:39:59 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][28010]: ERROR: cdp [authstatemachine.c:404]: auth_client_statefull_sm_process(): auth_client_statefull_sm_process(): Received invalid event 6 while in state Open! Sep 25 18:40:00 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][28034]: CRITICAL: <core> [core/pass_fd.c:277]: receive_fd(): EOF on 77 Sep 25 18:40:01 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][28026]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:301]: tcp_read_data(): error reading: Connection timed out (110) ([10.100.100.218]:1337 -> Sep 25 18:40:01 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][28026]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:302]: tcp_read_data(): -> [10.161.224.228]:5060) Sep 25 18:40:01 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][28026]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:1485]: tcp_read_req(): ERROR: tcp_read_req: error reading - c: 0x7f92ca87f070 r: 0x7f92ca87f0f0 Sep 25 18:40:01 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][27919]: ALERT: <core> [main.c:748]: handle_sigs(): child process 27989 exited by a signal 11 Sep 25 18:40:01 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][27919]: ALERT: <core> [main.c:751]: handle_sigs(): core was generated Sep 25 18:40:01 pcscf kernel: [52613904.372973] net_ratelimit: 29 callbacks suppressed Sep 25 18:40:01 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][27919]: CRITICAL: cdp [diameter_peer.c:423]: diameter_peer_destroy(): destroy_diameter_peer(): Bye Bye from C Diameter Peer test Sep 25 18:40:01 pcscf CRON[30581]: (root) CMD (/bin/bash /root/volumes/monitoring/src/services_status.sh -p http://10.161.224.25:9091 -s kamailio_pcscf,sems -n pcscf) Sep 25 18:40:01 pcscf CRON[30580]: (CRON) info (No MTA installed, discarding output) Sep 25 18:40:02 pcscf sems[2858]: [#7f2080044700] [update_uac_request, trans_layer.cpp:2080] WARNING: While sending 200 ACK: no matching transaction Sep 25 18:41:01 pcscf [Proxy-CSCF][27919]: CRITICAL: <core> [main.c:654]: sig_alarm_abort(): shutdown timeout triggered, dying... PS: Kamailio is not listening on localhost. Regards Hamid R. Hashmi

3 4

REFER from MS teams to Kamailio.
by Yuriy Nasida 04 Dec '20

04 Dec '20

Well, I saw similar questions in the list already but looks like nobody has answer. Please look at REFER below. Kamilio get REFER from MS and sends it to FS node. Next, FS node try to make 3th call for some reason.I expect that FS will not do 3th call and just will connect Alice and Bob itself. 2020/05/14 12:32:00.637027 KAM_IP:5060 -> FS_IP:5060 REFER sip:Alice_number@FS_IP:5060;transport=udp SIP/2.0 FROM: Customer1<sip:MS_TRUNK_NUMBER@sip.pstnhub.microsoft.com:5061 ;user=phone>;tag=a860c50a3fb54d08b4e5740fa2dfb3d6 TO: <sip:Alice_number@FQDN_OF_TRUNK:5061>;user=phone;tag=e8ct9S6ty13va CSEQ: 4 REFER CALL-ID: 2c71b2a6669b5343a231e1244b19c945 MAX-FORWARDS: 50 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP FQDN_OF_TRUNK:5060;branch=z9hG4bK10ae.2c42897feca117121a23bf0c8d54cd19.0;i=c VIA: SIP/2.0/TLS 52.114.75.24:5061;branch=z9hG4bK7e3e8998 CONTACT: <sip:api-du-a-euwe.pstnhub.microsoft.com:443 ;x-i=6b68e7aa-f5e2-44ec-9edf-0bacbabfce07;x-c=2c71b2a6669b5343a231e1244b19c945/d/8/b68f86794a8e44d19543f8edbee6b2fc CONTENT-LENGTH: 0 REFER-TO: <sip:Bob_number@sip.pstnhub.microsoft.com:5061 ;user=phone;transport=tls> REFERRED-BY: <sip:sip.pstnhub.microsoft.com:5061 ;x-m=8:orgid:21bc47d3-c050-4292-8234-46f7005b97aa;x-t=fb788ef8-3c4c-455a-8d62-f3c20832c0d3;x-ti=6b68e7aa-f5e2-44ec-9edf- acbabfce07;x-tt=aHR0cHM6Ly9hcGktZHUtYS1ldXdlLnBzdG5odWIubWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbS92MS9uZ2MvY2FsbG5vdGlmaWNhdGlvbj9kY2k9YzIxMjE3MzEyNTQ2NDk1ZjlhYTcwODliYTkwNGIxZGQ%3D> USER-AGENT: Microsoft.PSTNHub.SIPProxy v.2020.5.6.2 i.EUWE.4 ALLOW: INVITE,ACK,OPTIONS,CANCEL,BYE,NOTIFY P-ASSERTED-IDENTITY: <tel:MS_TRUNK_NUMBER>,< sip:customer1@m365x587912.onmicrosoft.com> PRIVACY: id X-AUTH-IP: 52.114.75.24 X-AUTH-PORT: 3136 Any advice?

4 11

issues using evapi module
by David Escartin 26 Nov '20

26 Nov '20

Dear all We are trying to use the evapi module to send some data to an external application but I'm having problems getting the clients connected. I have the kamailio (version 5.3) running with a tcp socket 127.0.0.1:8228, and the evapi params are just modparam("evapi", "workers", 4) modparam("evapi", "netstring_format", 0) modparam("evapi", "bind_addr", "127.0.0.1:8448") modparam("evapi", "max_clients", 32) I tried a different number of workers and netstring_format 1 too. When I start the kamailio i added some debug to the code, and seems when doing the mod init of the evapi dispatcher 38(4779) DEBUG: <core> [core/sr_module.c:779]: init_mod_child(): idx 38 rank -2: evapi [EvAPI Dispatcher] it reaches to while(1) { ev_loop (loop, 0); } at evapi_run_dispatcher function. I guess if I connected to the tcp socket and sent some event, I would see the client accepted and the event route evapi:connection-new would be triggered. But i'm not able to do that. I tried to use the prime option, a tcp input client connection from logstash, so i could relay the data to the logstash using the evapi relay, but i only see the tcp socket being created but no client accepted. I also tried to connect with an erlang gen_tcp client, but it's the same i only see 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/ip_addr.c:229]: print_ip(): tcpconn_new: new tcp connection: 127.0.0.1 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/tcp_main.c:1174]: tcpconn_new(): on port 54537, type 2, socket 105 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/tcp_main.c:1497]: tcpconn_add(): hashes: 1117:1187:1505, 1 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/io_wait.h:375]: io_watch_add(): DBG: io_watch_add(0xad0880, 105, 2, 0x7fc211712d58), fd_no=53 and if i try to send any data 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/io_wait.h:600]: io_watch_del(): DBG: io_watch_del (0xad0880, 105, -1, 0x0) fd_no=54 called 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/tcp_main.c:4456]: handle_tcpconn_ev(): sending to child, events 1 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/tcp_main.c:4129]: send2child(): selected tcp worker idx:0 proc:43 pid:4791 for activity on [tcp:127.0.0.1:8448], 0x7fc211712d58 43(4791) DEBUG: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:1749]: handle_io(): received n=8 con=0x7fc211712d58, fd=39 43(4791) DEBUG: <core> [core/io_wait.h:375]: io_watch_add(): DBG: io_watch_add(0xb3c720, 39, 2, 0x7fc211712d58), fd_no=1 43(4791) DEBUG: <core> [core/io_wait.h:600]: io_watch_del(): DBG: io_watch_del (0xb3c720, 39, -1, 0x10) fd_no=2 called 43(4791) DEBUG: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:1671]: release_tcpconn(): releasing con 0x7fc211712d58, state 1, fd=39, id=1 ([127.0.0.1]:54537 -> [127.0.0.1]:8448) 43(4791) DEBUG: <core> [core/tcp_read.c:1672]: release_tcpconn(): extra_data (nil) 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/tcp_main.c:3559]: handle_tcp_child(): reader response= 7fc211712d58, 1 from 0 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/io_wait.h:375]: io_watch_add(): DBG: io_watch_add(0xad0880, 105, 2, 0x7fc211712d58), fd_no=53 47(4798) DEBUG: <core> [core/tcp_main.c:3686]: handle_tcp_child(): CONN_RELEASE 0x7fc211712d58 refcnt= 1 and when i try to send any data 38(10867) DEBUG: evapi [evapi_dispatch.c:610]: evapi_recv_notify(): received [0x7f17d23fc628] [{"test" : "1.1.1.1", "uuid" : "1-31629(a)3.3.3.3" , "pdd" : "4"}] (75) 38(10867) DEBUG: evapi [evapi_dispatch.c:316]: evapi_dispatch_notify(): the message was sent to 0 clients I don't know what i'm missing, or if i'm understanding the use of the module correctly could you please take a look? thanks a lot David -- [image: Logo] David Escartín Almudévar VoIP/Switch Engineer descartin(a)sonoc.io *SONOC* C/ Josefa Amar y Borbón, 10, 4ª · 50001 Zaragoza, España Tlf: +34 917019888 · www.sonoc.io

2 5

Add Reason Header to kamailio generated CANCEL
by Alfonso Pinto 18 Nov '20

18 Nov '20

Hi everyone, I've got a specific case: when the inv_fr times out, I need to add a Reason header to the CANCEL generated by kamailio. I've tried to see if I could do it in the onsend_route, but that one is not triggered for the generated CANCEL. I also checked event_route[tm:local-request], but that one isn't triggered either for the generated CANCEL. Is there any way to do it? Or maybe to have any pointer about where to look in the code so I may try to trigger event_route[tm:local-request] for these generated CANCELs? Regards, Alfonso

6 17

Dispatcher stops working
by Sergio Charrua 12 Oct '20

12 Oct '20

Hello, Using Kamailio 5.1.6 for load balancing & failover, I noticed that from time to time, and very rarely, the dispatcher module stops dispatching to the Asterisk servers. I have to execute a "kamcmd dispatcher reload" for it to (re)start working. This is my dispatcher.list : 1 sip:10.19.XXX.YYY:5060 0 1 duid=sipgw01;maxload=100 1 sip:10.19.XXX.YYY:5060 0 2 duid=sipgw02;maxload=100 1 sip:10.19.XXX.YYY:5060 0 3 duid=sipgw03;maxload=100 1 sip:10.19.XXX.YYY:5060 0 4 duid=sipgw04;maxload=100 This is my dispatch routes: # Dispatch requests route[DISPATCH] { if(!ds_select_dst("1", "10","4")) { xlog("L_INFO","no destination selected from dispatcher list!"); send_reply("404", "No destination"); exit; } xlog("L_INFO","going to <$ru> via <$du>\n"); t_on_failure("RTF_DISPATCH"); route(RELAY); exit; } # Sample failure route failure_route[RTF_DISPATCH] { if (t_is_canceled()) { exit; } xlog("L_INFO", "Media server $du failed to answer, selecting other one!"); # next DST - only for 500 or local timeout if ( t_check_status("500") || (t_branch_timeout() && !t_branch_replied()) ) { #mark the destination Inactive and Probing ds_mark_dst("ip"); if(ds_next_dst()) { t_on_failure("RTF_DISPATCH"); route(RELAY); exit; } } } I suspect that the ds_mark_dst("ip") command in RTF_DISPACTH is the cause. Is there any think I can improve on this? Or any know bug with the dispatcher in Kamailio 5.1.6 version? Thanks in advance, *Sérgio Charrua*

4 4

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 September 2020