sr-users September 2021

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

46 participants
65 discussions

Kamailio and robotics repo
by Yuriy Gorlichenko 07 Sep '21

07 Sep '21

Following the promise during the Kamailio world 2021 I share the source code of the Kamailoi and robotics repo: https://github.com/arigativa/robolive

2 1

Manage multiple RTP streams with different TO-tags (forking)
by B. Tietz 07 Sep '21

07 Sep '21

Hello, following situation. I have a Kamailio (5.4) using rtpengine to loadbalance calls. If a call from Alice comes in, Kamailio decides to send the call to Carrier B from Bob. Bobs Phone is ringing and the carrier B send a 183 Session Progress with SDP and To-tag=abcd. The SDP has G722 as codec and port 1234. A few moments later carrier B send a second 183 Session Progress with SDP and TO-tag=fghi. The SDP has G711 as codec and port 5678. This is done, to play some funky music as ringtone -.- If Bob answers the call, carrier B sends a 200 OK WITHOUT SDP and TO-tag=abcd. So this should instruct our Kamailio to switch to the first G722 and port 1234. But sadly, this is just not working as expected. We tried to set the flags media-handover and port-latching for the rtpengine options and additionally set a to-tag when using rtpenging_manage. But this doesn't solve the codec change, so we have only audio when Bob answers the call, but no ringtone-music. If we allow G711 only in the outgoing INVITE to Bob, we have also tha ringtone-muisic, because there is no codec-change. Carrier B tells us, they are using a fork-mechanism. Is there something we can do, to support the codec change in 183? Or enforce carrier B to send SDP in 200 OK? Or anything else? Carrier B can not change anything in the ringtone-music-backend. They are stuck on G711. Thanks!

5 4

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

How to drop negative final response and send ACK
by Koray Vatansever 02 Sep '21

02 Sep '21

Hi, I have a problem with the following scenario: I have web and mobile sip clients for the same username. If both clients are idle, INVITE is forked and both clients ring. If web client is busy and mobile client is online and registered, the mobile client rings and the caller hears ringback tone. If web client is busy and mobile client is offline, before the mobile client receives push notification and registers, web client sends 486 busy response and caller hears busy tone. In this last scenario, I want to wait some time for the mobile client to register and ring. I tried to drop 486 response in onreply_route[x], but I found that final responses cannot be dropped in this route. I dropped 486 in reply_route, but I couldn't send an ACK for this transaction. Is there a way to implement this scenario? I would appreciate if you have any suggestions. Thanks, Koray

2 2

dns_srv_lb on or yes
by Juha Heinanen 01 Sep '21

01 Sep '21

Wiki tells: dns_srv_lb = yes | no (default no) and doc/tutorials/dns.txt tells: dns_srv_lb = on | off Which one is correct or does it matter? -- Juha

2 3

2026

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 2021