sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

16 participants
37527 discussions

ACC error | failed to insert into database
by alex pappas 02 Feb '11

02 Feb '11

Hi all, Hve anyone seen before the following error? *Kamailio acc [acc.c:398]: failed to insert into database* After a Kamailio restart it is ok but it start again afetr x time. Thank you Alex

2 2

Re: [SR-Users] t_local_replied() ?
by Bernhard Suttner 01 Feb '11

01 Feb '11

argh. I just mixed up the true/false return values in the eMail but you still got it :-) Thanks a lot! ----- Original Message ----- From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com] To: Bernhard Suttner [mailto:bernhard.suttner@winet.ch] Cc: sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org Sent: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 20:31:17 +0100 Subject: Re: [SR-Users] t_local_replied() ? > Hello, > > not sure if you ask about the options, or you tried them and don't give > you the needed feature, since there are some improper true/false return > codes in your email. t_branch_replied() will return false if the 408 is > generated locally. > > Cheers, > Daniel > > On 2/1/11 8:25 PM, Bernhard Suttner wrote: > > Hi, > > > > just to be sure: > > > > - If the gateway does send back a 100 Trying and then a 408 is detected > within failure_route the method t_branch_replied does return false (means: > gateway is up and running) - dont go to next gateway (dispatcher) > > > > - If the gateway does not respond and a 408 is detected within > failure_route (= 408 was generated from kamailio) t_branch_replied does > return true (means: gateway is down) - go to the next gateway (dispatcher) > > > > Is that correct or am I wrong? > > > > Best regards, > > Bernhard > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com] > > To: Bernhard Suttner [mailto:bernhard.suttner@winet.ch] > > Cc: sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org > > Sent: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 13:30:54 +0100 > > Subject: Re: [SR-Users] t_local_replied() ? > > > > > >> Hello, > >> > >> On 2/1/11 12:08 PM, Bernhard Suttner wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I am using the dispatcher module and want to check within the > >> failure_route if the 408 was internally generated from kamailio or it was > >> received from the dispatcher gateway. > >>> There was previously a function called t_local_replied() in the > TM-module > >> but I could not find this function in the current documentation. Was it > >> removed? > >>> Is there a alternative to check if the 408 was local generated or if it > >> was received from the peer (= from the dispatcher gateway)? > >> see the example of: > >> http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules/tm.html#t_branch_replied > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Daniel > >> > >> -- > >> Daniel-Constantin Mierla > >> http://www.asipto.com > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list > > sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org > > http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla > http://www.asipto.com > >

1 0

Re: [SR-Users] t_local_replied() ?
by Bernhard Suttner 01 Feb '11

01 Feb '11

Hi, just to be sure: - If the gateway does send back a 100 Trying and then a 408 is detected within failure_route the method t_branch_replied does return false (means: gateway is up and running) - dont go to next gateway (dispatcher) - If the gateway does not respond and a 408 is detected within failure_route (= 408 was generated from kamailio) t_branch_replied does return true (means: gateway is down) - go to the next gateway (dispatcher) Is that correct or am I wrong? Best regards, Bernhard ----- Original Message ----- From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla [mailto:miconda@gmail.com] To: Bernhard Suttner [mailto:bernhard.suttner@winet.ch] Cc: sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org Sent: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 13:30:54 +0100 Subject: Re: [SR-Users] t_local_replied() ? > Hello, > > On 2/1/11 12:08 PM, Bernhard Suttner wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am using the dispatcher module and want to check within the > failure_route if the 408 was internally generated from kamailio or it was > received from the dispatcher gateway. > > > > There was previously a function called t_local_replied() in the TM-module > but I could not find this function in the current documentation. Was it > removed? > > > > Is there a alternative to check if the 408 was local generated or if it > was received from the peer (= from the dispatcher gateway)? > see the example of: > http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules/tm.html#t_branch_replied > > Cheers, > Daniel > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla > http://www.asipto.com > >

2 1

Radius and kamailio: avp unknown attribute
by Dominguez Jover, Ricardo 01 Feb '11

01 Feb '11

Hi everybody, I have a problem with Kamalio and Radius, when a try to authenticate a user I get the following: Feb 1 11:50:48 kamailiodes /usr/local/kamailio-3.1/sbin/kamailio[5941]: rc_avpair_new: unknown attribute 5 Feb 1 11:50:48 kamailiodes /usr/local/kamailio-3.1/sbin/kamailio[5941]: ERROR: auth_radius [sterman.c:412]: authorization failed In fact I can't see any packet sended to the Radius Server from Kamailio. I've read several posts and I've chmod of /var/run/radius.seq, include dictionary.sip in dictionary.radius and so on. Changing "if (!radius_www_authorize("$td"))" with " if (!radius_www_authorize(""))" I don't get any error but and can't neither see any packet sended to the Radius Server. I've checked the connection between radius client and radius server and it's OK, I get: Received response ID 91, code 2, length = 211 Any help would be appreciated. Kind regards, Ricardo Dominguez

2 2

Trunk connection asterisk-kamailio
by Mino Haluz 01 Feb '11

01 Feb '11

Hi, I have a question about kamailio-asterik interconnection. I'd like to connect 1000 numbers with a trunk, but it would be painful to add 1000 trunks on asterisk. Do you have some idea how could I group those numbers into one trunk connected to kamailio? asterisk and kamailio configuration settings. Thank you very much.

2 1

t_local_replied() ?
by Bernhard Suttner 01 Feb '11

01 Feb '11

Hi, I am using the dispatcher module and want to check within the failure_route if the 408 was internally generated from kamailio or it was received from the dispatcher gateway. There was previously a function called t_local_replied() in the TM-module but I could not find this function in the current documentation. Was it removed? Is there a alternative to check if the 408 was local generated or if it was received from the peer (= from the dispatcher gateway)? Thanks in advance! Best regards, Bernhard

2 1

kamailio and sip-router at FOSDEM 2011 - social event
by Henning Westerholt 31 Jan '11

31 Jan '11

Hello, in about two and a half week the annual open source developer conference FOSDEM (http://fosdem.org/2011/) takes place in Brussels. As in the last two years we would like to meet here for a social event, probably a dinner on Saturday evening, 6th February. This developers already confirmed their participance: - Daniel-Constantin Mierla - Marius Zbihlei - Henning Westerholt This year we'll also be present in the Open Source Telephony room on sunday with two talks, "Scaling location services in large SIP networks with Kamailio from Marius and myself, and "Unifying SIP and Web worlds with Lua (Kamailio)" from Daniel. Olivier Taylor agreed helping us again in choosing a nice place for the evening. Participation at the event is free of charge, everybody pays for its own expenses. In order to organize a restaurant and do a reservation please send me a short mail if you would like to attend. Looking forward to see you in Brussels! Best regards, Henning P.S.: Photos of the 2009 event can be found on the web site: http://www.kamailio.org/events/2009-FOSDEM/FOSDEM2009-Album/ -- Henning Westerholt - Head of IT Operations Internet Access & Communications 1&1 Internet AG, Karlsruhe, Germany

2 3

xlogl and pseudo variables
by Bernhard Suttner 29 Jan '11

29 Jan '11

Hi, I am using xlogl for debugging and logging the most important actions within the kamailio script. Does it take much resources if I use the pseudo variables with the xlogl statements? Example: xlogl("L_NOTICE", "Route $rm to destination! F=$fu T=$tu IP=$si \n"); I´m planning to do this in all the xlogl statements to be able to debug / "see whats going on" on the system. Thanks in advance. Best regard, Bernhard

2 1

Re: [SR-Users] onreply_route and failure_route
by Bernhard Suttner 29 Jan '11

29 Jan '11

Hi, that was _really_ fast. Thanks. :-) One more question: Could I somehow test with the route[NAT] for example, if the request was from the main route { ... } or from the onreply_route[] ? Best regards, Bernhard ----- Original Message ----- From: Alex Balashov [mailto:abalashov@evaristesys.com] To: Bernhard Suttner [mailto:bernhard.suttner@winet.ch] Cc: sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org [mailto:sr-users@lists.sip-router.org] Sent: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 21:37:34 +0100 Subject: Re: [SR-Users] onreply_route and failure_route > Yes. > > -- > Alex Balashov - Principal > Evariste Systems LLC > 260 Peachtree Street NW > Suite 2200 > Atlanta, GA 30303 > Tel: +1-678-954-0670 > Fax: +1-404-961-1892 > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/ > > On Jan 29, 2011, at 3:35 PM, "Bernhard Suttner" <bernhard.suttner(a)winet.ch > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > is it possible to call a route within onreply_ and failure_route? I > > mean, within the main route { ... } its possible to call the route > > [NAT]. Is this also possible for this "special" routes? If this is > > possible, is it also allowed to call a route which will normally > > called from the main route { ... } > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Best regards, > > Bernhard > > > > _______________________________________________ > > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing > > list > > sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org > > http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >

1 0

onreply_route and failure_route
by Bernhard Suttner 29 Jan '11

29 Jan '11

Hi, is it possible to call a route within onreply_ and failure_route? I mean, within the main route { ... } its possible to call the route[NAT]. Is this also possible for this "special" routes? If this is possible, is it also allowed to call a route which will normally called from the main route { ... } Thanks in advance. Best regards, Bernhard

2 1

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