sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

42 participants
37519 discussions

Fwd: pv_buffer_size config value actually ignored?
by Enrico Bandiera 14 Feb '19

14 Feb '19

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Enrico Bandiera <enrico.bandiera(a)cloud.timenet.it> Date: mer 13 feb 2019 alle ore 09:18 Subject: Re: [SR-Users] pv_buffer_size config value actually ignored? To: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda(a)gmail.com> Hello Daniel, yes we do use that $avp for a log line which is actually a big json, the $avp is composed by multiple jansson_append calls and at the end an xlog() calls prints it Could it also be that I'm miscalculating because of the encoding? 4K utf8 characters could be more than 4K (but I don't think there are so many multibytes characters to let it reach the 8K limit) Il giorno mer 13 feb 2019 alle ore 09:15 Daniel-Constantin Mierla < miconda(a)gmail.com> ha scritto: > Hello, > > where do you use that avp, because for the avp value itself, that buffer > is not used -- avp values are stored in shared memory. > > Do you use that avp in xlog() or other functions parameters? > > Cheers, > Daniel > On 13.02.19 09:10, Enrico Bandiera wrote: > > Hi, I'm having some strange issues with a somewhat big $avp value, when it > reaches a size of about 4K I get this error: > > 29(47) ERROR: <core> [core/pvapi.c:1452]: pv_printf(): no more space for > spec value > 29(47) ERROR: <core> [core/pvapi.c:1461]: pv_printf(): buffer overflow – > increase the buffer size... > > In the docs I read that the default pv_buffer_size is 8K, I still tried to > enforce it to something bigger and checked the logs to be sure it was set: > > 0(384) DEBUG: <core> [core/pvapi.c:2062]: pv_init_buffer(): PV print > buffer initialized to [40][16384] > > But still when reaching the 4K size inside the $avp that error comes out, > is there any limit I'm not aware of? > > Thanks, > Enrico. > > _______________________________________________ > Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing Listsr-users@lists.kamailio.orghttps://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.comwww.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda > Kamailio World Conference - May 6-8, 2019 -- www.kamailioworld.com > Kamailio Advanced Training - Mar 4-6, 2019 in Berlin; Mar 25-27, 2019, in Washington, DC, USA -- www.asipto.com > >

2 6

TM Module - Unfortunately error on sending to next hop occurred (477/TM)
by Ilie Soltanici 14 Feb '19

14 Feb '19

Hi List, Can someone give a hint related to this issue, please? On other messages, I found that this problem may happen why variable $du is empty, but in my case looks that it's present: Config File: if (!t_relay()) { switch ($retcode) { case -1: xlogl("L_ERR", "[$cfg(route)] Generic Internal Error\n"); xlogl("L_ERR", "[$cfg(route)] | $du/$ru |\n"); break; Log File: [RELAY] Generic Internal Error [RELAY] | sip:192.168.180.23:15109/sip:1003@ 192.168.180.23:15109 | sl [sl_funcs.c:372]: sl_reply_error(): stateless error reply used: I'm terribly sorry, server error occurred (1/SL) Also, as I understand this may happen when there is a problem on the physical network, i'm not sure that is my case - because kamailio and asterisk are 2 VM's running on the same Physical Server, and both their interfaces are connected to the same Virtual Switch. There is no firewalls/selinux on those servers. Can someone help please?

2 1

Kamailio/Dispatcher failure routing to SRV record
by Jesse Strahn 13 Feb '19

13 Feb '19

Hi all, I'm hoping someone can help me with this as I am baffled. I have a server running Kamailio with dispatcher. I am trying to direct calls from kamailio to an SRV record but am receiving a 404 error on the calls. If I instead place one of the hostnames from the SRV record in my dispatcher.list, the call completes fine. Contents of dispatcher.list look like: 1 sip:bvr.production.instance:5060 Nslookup from the Kamailio server for SRV record: nslookup -type=SRV _sip._udp.bvr.production.instance Server: 10.0.0.2 Address: 10.0.0.2#53 Non-authoritative answer: _sip._udp.bvr.production.instance service = 1 10 5060 ip-10-100-79-143.production.instance. _sip._udp.bvr.production.instance service = 1 10 5060 ip-10-100-96-92.production.instance. Again, if I put 1 sip: ip-10-100-96-92.production.instance:5060 into the dispatcher.list, the call routes fine. Is there some configuration within Kamailio required to route to an SRV record in this way? I haven't found anything indicating that is the case. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jesse

2 2

Mysql to hastable conversion
by Duarte Rocha 13 Feb '19

13 Feb '19

Greetings, I have Kamailio has an SBC and i'm using a MySQL database to store all the relevant configurations and settings regarding the NAP's, Users, Numbers, etc. That being said, i'm having lots of of performance issues originated by the queries. In order to solve that i think the best way to proceed would be to implement hashtables. However, i would like to keep Sql DB's for easier configuration and having them automatically transformed into hashtables. Is there a simple way to do this? As i see, the htable module is able to load from a DB, but i understand it, the table should be already in "hashtable form". Does kamailio has any way to solve this or should i use external tools? Best Regards, Duarte Rocha

2 1

kamailio with oracle data base
by eyas barhouk 13 Feb '19

13 Feb '19

Hello Community i'm trying to build kamailio on top of oracle D.B so is there any way to configure kamailio to deal with Oracle D.B and call functions from it ? Thanks in advance. Regards Eyas

4 9

Cannot get message routing for websockets "invalid" URI
by Sergey Safarov 13 Feb '19

13 Feb '19

I have configured websocket usage using this module description https://kamailio.org/docs/modules/devel/modules/websocket.html Added registrar and usrloc modules Registration saved using this block route[REGISTRAR] { if(!is_method("REGISTER")) return; if (!save("location")) { xlog("L_INFO", "Location save error\n"); sl_reply_error(); } } Now in database i can see WebRTC client registration { "jsonrpc": "2.0", "result": { "Domains": [{ "Domain": { "Domain": "location", "Size": 1024, "AoRs": [{ "Info": { "AoR": "1000", "HashID": 924766747, "Contacts": [{ "Contact": { "Address": "sips:1000@df7jal23ls0d.invalid ;rtcweb-breaker=no;transport=wss", "Expires": 155, "Q": -1, "Call-ID": "0c818ac1-5e77-bd4c-b7fe-a135d6c6a4bf", "CSeq": 61442, "User-Agent": "IM-client/OMA1.0 sipML5-v1.2016.03.04", "Received": "[not set]", "Path": "[not set]", "State": "CS_SYNC", "Flags": 0, "CFlags": 0, "Socket": "tls:192.168.2.10:7443", "Methods": -1, "Ruid": "uloc-5c643a67-4b56-1", "Instance": "[not set]", "Reg-Id": 0, "Server-Id": 0, "Tcpconn-Id": 2, "Keepalive": 0, "Last-Keepalive": 1550074434, "Last-Modified": 1550074434 } }] } } ], "Stats": { "Records": 1, "Max-Slots": 1 } } }] }, "id": 19493 } Now I try deliver call to WebRTC client. Kamailio receives message INVITE sip:1001@192.168.30.2 SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.30.2:45060;rport;branch=z9hG4bK5gaK3B38egZQH Route: <sip:192.168.2.10> Max-Forwards: 70 From: "" <sip:0000000000@192.168.30.2>;tag=8e7Za8pD6pcKg To: <sip:1001@192.168.30.2> Call-ID: 989274f0-aa4d-1237-08a1-94b86deaeed5 CSeq: 483510 INVITE Contact: <sip:mod_sofia@192.168.30.2:45060> User-Agent: FreeSWITCH-mod_sofia/1.8.4+git-20181228T070140Z~a0377e9677~64bit Allow: INVITE, ACK, BYE, CANCEL, OPTIONS, MESSAGE, INFO, UPDATE, REGISTER, REFER, NOTIFY, PUBLISH, SUBSCRIBE Supported: timer, path, replaces Allow-Events: talk, hold, conference, presence, as-feature-event, dialog, line-seize, call-info, sla, include-session-description, presence.winfo, message-summary, refer Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Disposition: session Content-Length: 621 X-FS-Support: update_display,send_info Remote-Party-ID: <sip:0000000000@192.168.30.2 >;party=calling;screen=yes;privacy=off Expected that Kamailio using follow config block route message to WEbRTC client via websocket. route[FROM_FS] { record_route(); if (!lookup("location")) { $var(rc) = $rc; t_newtran(); switch ($var(rc)) { case -1: case -3: send_reply("404", "Not Found"); exit; case -2: send_reply("405", "Method Not Allowed"); exit; } } route(RELAY); exit; } But really Kamailio try resolve "sips:1000@df7jal23ls0d.invalid" URI via DNS and deliver for non locally connected device 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[DEFAULT_ROUTE] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=238 a=16 n=if 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[DEFAULT_ROUTE] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=231 a=41 n=isflagset 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[DEFAULT_ROUTE] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=232 a=5 n=route 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[FROM_FS] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=266 a=24 n=record_route 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[FROM_FS] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=281 a=16 n=if 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[FROM_FS] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=267 a=25 n=lookup 3(19341) DEBUG: registrar [lookup.c:255]: lookup_helper(): contact for [1000] found by address 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[FROM_FS] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=281 a=5 n=route 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[RELAY] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=289 a=16 n=if 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[RELAY] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=286 a=24 n=t_relay 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1326]: t_newtran(): msg id=2 , global msg id=2 , T on entrance=0 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:483]: t_lookup_request(): start searching: hash=7468, isACK=0 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:441]: matching_3261(): RFC3261 transaction matching failed - via branch [z9hG4bK72v4614F91BXr] 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:666]: t_lookup_request(): no transaction found 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_hooks.c:348]: run_reqin_callbacks_internal(): trans=0x7fbb0b1d0d40, callback type 1, id 0 entered 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/md5utils.c:67]: MD5StringArray(): MD5 calculated: 07ad473ba02a6d3a4f8753a378c102e8 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:324]: t_relay_to(): new INVITE 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:596]: _reply_light(): reply sent out. buf=0x7fbb0f256750: SIP/2.0 100 trying -..., shmem=0x7fbb0b1e75d8: SIP/2.0 100 trying - 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:607]: _reply_light(): finished 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/dns_cache.c:527]: _dns_hash_find(): (_sips._tcp.df7jal23ls0d.invalid(31), 33), h=232 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/resolve.c:967]: get_record(): skipping 1 NS (p=0x561007b83e71, end=0x561007b83ebc) 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/resolve.c:980]: get_record(): parsing 0 ARs (p=0x561007b83ebc, end=0x561007b83ebc) 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/dns_cache.c:761]: dns_cache_mk_bad_entry(): (_sips._tcp.df7jal23ls0d.invalid, 33, 60, 1) 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/dns_cache.c:701]: dns_cache_add(): adding _sips._tcp.df7jal23ls0d.invalid(31) 33 (flags=1) at 232 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/dns_cache.c:527]: _dns_hash_find(): (df7jal23ls0d.invalid(20), 1), h=139 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/resolve.c:967]: get_record(): skipping 1 NS (p=0x561007b83e66, end=0x561007b83eb1) 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/resolve.c:980]: get_record(): parsing 0 ARs (p=0x561007b83eb1, end=0x561007b83eb1) 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/dns_cache.c:761]: dns_cache_mk_bad_entry(): (df7jal23ls0d.invalid, 1, 60, 1) 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/dns_cache.c:701]: dns_cache_add(): adding df7jal23ls0d.invalid(20) 1 (flags=1) at 139 3(19341) ERROR: <core> [core/resolve.c:1698]: sip_hostport2su(): could not resolve hostname: "df7jal23ls0d.invalid" 3(19341) ERROR: tm [ut.h:309]: uri2dst2(): failed to resolve "df7jal23ls0d.invalid" 3(19341) ERROR: tm [t_fwd.c:1735]: t_forward_nonack(): failure to add branches 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:334]: t_relay_to(): t_forward_nonack returned error -478 (-478) 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_funcs.c:352]: t_relay_to(): -478 error reply generation delayed 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[RELAY] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=287 a=24 n=sl_reply_error 3(19341) ERROR: sl [sl_funcs.c:372]: sl_reply_error(): stateless error reply used: Unresolvable destination (478/SL) 3(19341) exec: *** cfgtrace:request_route=[RELAY] c=[/usr/local/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=289 a=2 n=exit 3(19341) DEBUG: <core> [core/receive.c:353]: receive_msg(): request-route executed in: 12632 usec 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_lookup.c:1490]: t_unref(): delayed error reply generation(-478) 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:1650]: cleanup_uac_timers(): RETR/FR timers reset 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:596]: _reply_light(): reply sent out. buf=0x7fbb0f2571f0: SIP/2.0 478 Unresolv..., shmem=0x7fbb0b1e7860: SIP/2.0 478 Unresolv 3(19341) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:607]: _reply_light(): finished Looks I missed some thing in message routing, But cannot find what. Please point me how to properly route call for this case.

1 0

$HN(d) null when DNS cache is enabled
by Julien Klingenmeyer 13 Feb '19

13 Feb '19

Hello, I have a small question regarding the internal DNS resolver. Here is my current Kamailio DNS configuration: dns_try_naptr=on use_dns_failover=yes use_dns_cache=yes I need the $HN variable inside my script and it appeared while testing that $HN(d) was null (and consequently $HN(f) was only containing the hostname part of the FQDN). I know /etc/hosts file is bypassed when the DNS cache is activated, so I thought Kamailio was using the domain parameter set in the /etc/resolv.conf file in such cases in order to get the domain. But it was not. I figured out Kamailio correctly retrieves the domain name as long as it is explicitly part of the /etc/hostname file. Is my understanding correct or am I wrong somewhere? What if /etc/hostname does not contain the domain name but hostname only? Thanks! Cheers Julien

1 0

pv_buffer_size config value actually ignored?
by Enrico Bandiera 13 Feb '19

13 Feb '19

Hi, I'm having some strange issues with a somewhat big $avp value, when it reaches a size of about 4K I get this error: 29(47) ERROR: <core> [core/pvapi.c:1452]: pv_printf(): no more space for spec value 29(47) ERROR: <core> [core/pvapi.c:1461]: pv_printf(): buffer overflow – increase the buffer size... In the docs I read that the default pv_buffer_size is 8K, I still tried to enforce it to something bigger and checked the logs to be sure it was set: 0(384) DEBUG: <core> [core/pvapi.c:2062]: pv_init_buffer(): PV print buffer initialized to [40][16384] But still when reaching the 4K size inside the $avp that error comes out, is there any limit I'm not aware of? Thanks, Enrico.

2 1

memory issue with jsonrpc
by Benjamin Roy 12 Feb '19

12 Feb '19

Hi, I'm hoping someone can guide me in the right direction. In kamailio 5.2.1 I'm getting the following memory errors after a while (hours or days) of sending messages with jsonrpc. Restarting kamailio clears them for a while. Any suggestions on what I should change, or how to better identify the issue? 24(6177) ERROR: <core> [core/mem/q_malloc.c:291]: qm_find_free(): qm_find_free(0x7f1cbe6fd000, 5712); Free fragment not found! 24(6177) ERROR: <core> [core/mem/q_malloc.c:425]: qm_malloc(): qm_malloc(0x7f1cbe6fd000, 5712) called from tm: h_table.c: build_cell(339), module: tm; Free fragment not found! 24(6177) ERROR: tm [uac.c:422]: t_uac_prepare(): short of cell shmem 24(6177) ERROR: pua [send_publish.c:700]: send_publish(): in t_request tm module function 24(6177) ERROR: pua_rpc [pua_rpc.c:280]: pua_rpc_publish_mode(): pua send_publish failed I have these buffer values in the config file tcp_rd_buf_size=65536 pv_buffer_size=32768 and I'm running kamailio with these memory options "-m 1024 -M 16" The jsonrpc message I'm sending look like this { "jsonrpc": "2.0", "method": "pua.publish", "params": [ "sip:172.1.1.3:5060;transport=tcp", "300", "reg", "application/reginfo+xml", ".", ".", ".", ".", "<?xml version='1.0' ?> <reginfo state='partial' version='0' xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:reginfo' xmlns:xsi='http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance'> <registration aor='sip:55555@uw.edu' id='a19685' state='active'> <contact duration-registered='906' event='registered' id='c19685--1732979172--1829864152-2' q='1.0' state='active'> <uri>sips:55555@172.1.2.4:62270;transport=tls;avaya-sc-enabled</uri> <elin></elin> </contact> </registration> </reginfo> " ], "id": 1 } Thanks, -Ben

2 3

Programmatically modify SIP Requests/Responses in Kamailio
by Filippos Vasilakis 12 Feb '19

12 Feb '19

Hi, First of all I would like to congratulate and thank everyone who has worked in Kamailio. It looks like an awesome tool. I am starting a side project and I am not very familiar with Kamailio although I know SIP and VoIP in general, so I am more looking for answers that tell me if it's possible or not what I am asking along with some hints on how/where to look. Is there a way to filter/forward/modify(through the headers) incoming SIP requests and Kamailio SIP responses programmatically in Kamailio ? I have seen that you can run embedded code like Ruby, but I wonder if this is for simple things or more complex stuff which probably is in my case since there will be plenty of business logic to figure out what action to take with a SIP request. I have also found the EVAPI that is supposed to be handle events through TCP but not much more info available. So to sum up, is there a way to filter/forward/modify incoming SIP requests and create responses programmatically in Kamailio ? If yes, what's the proper way of doing that ? If no, any idea where I should look for that? Thanks, Filippos

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