- sr-users - kamailio.org

Info: Upgrading kamcli to work with Python3
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 30 Aug '19

30 Aug '19

Hello, with the perspective that Python2 is going to be removed from the major Linux distributes starting with the beginning of next year, the work to upgrade kamcli to run with Python3 has been started. >From now on, master branch of kamcli is expected to work only with Python3: * https://github.com/kamailio/kamcli There is still work to be done to upgrade all the code, but any use of it should be done with Python3 and eventual issues to be filed on bug tracker. Of course, pull requests are welcome as always! Who wants to use the version for Python2 has to use the code from git branch v1.2-python2. That branch is probably not going to receive any new feature, it will be kept for use with older systems (as well as a running option during the upgrade period to Python3). Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

1 0

IMC module not sending messages to members of a conference room
by david＠aslo.us 29 Aug '19

29 Aug '19

2 1

Kamailio 5.0.8 | authentification issue only with TCP/TLS
by Laurent Schweizer 29 Aug '19

29 Aug '19

Dear all, I have a kamailio running in version 5.0.8 and since fee weeks we have an issue with different users connected in TCP or TLS, sometimes authorization like for REGISTER are rejected and after a moment (can be few minute or hours) it work again and of course no change was done in the password .... We see this issue with different device, snom swyx, ... and on UDP we have no issue. I can see that when the Register is rejected it's with the error -2, so wrong password... # Authentication route route[AUTH] { if (is_method("REGISTER")) { # authenticate requests if (!auth_check("$fd", "subscriber", "1")) { switch($retcode) { case -1: sl_send_reply("503","Service not available"); exit; case -2: xlog("L_WARN", "auth error -2 username $au - src ip: $si \n"); auth_challenge("$fd", "0"); exit; I have attached an example of a trace where we can see a first REGISTER accepted and less than 2 minutes after a new one is rejected. ( in between they is a REGISTER without any Authorization header) Any idea ? BR Laurent

2 3

Connect Kamailio to ITSPs?
by Aingaran Thirunadarajah 29 Aug '19

29 Aug '19

Hello, Newbie here! Have Kamailio set up on a 512MB VPS. Created a couple of users, registered with Zoiper and can call between them. I am looking for documentation to connect the server to other VoIP providers (Signalwire, Anveo, VOIP.ms etc.) to make & receive calls from the external network (DIDs) / PSTN Can someone point me in the right direction? Thanks in advance.

2 1

Define properly IP in record-route header
by przeqpiciel 29 Aug '19

29 Aug '19

Hi, I have some issue and dont have enought knowledge to fix it. I have simple infrastructure. Internet -> router (NAT) -> kamailio -> asterisk Kamailio and Asterisk are inside the network and Kamailio places his own private address in the "record-route" headers instead of who's public. There is configuration to said to him what IP is proper ?

3 8

kamailio+asterisk VoiceMail implementation
by Zhan Bazarov 28 Aug '19

28 Aug '19

Hello, what's best practice for VoiceMail implementation in Kamailio+Asterisk's scheme? should I forward register into asterisk? Or I can keep register on kamailio? Could you, please, shed any lights on this

2 1

Disable GW's on runtime
by Duarte Rocha 28 Aug '19

28 Aug '19

Greetings, I have two Kamailio's working on a HA scenario. Both Kamailio's have DB replication and each machine has one HA IP. In order to set this up, i have every GW on the DB duplicated, one with Socket IPA and another with socket IPB. I have both GWs in a active state configurated in the replicated DB. They also both have the same URI and the same group id Example : GW1 : Socket = IPA ; GroupID = 1 ; Uri = sip:1.1.1.1:5060 GW2 : Socket = IPB ; GroupID = 1 ; Uri = sip:1.1.1.1:5060 In order to avoid errors, i want to disable on runtime the GWs that have a socket that doesn't belong, at the moment, to that machine (GW with Socket IPB on machine with IPA). To do that i would use the dispatcher.set_state, however it works with group id and address, which in this case it is the same. Is there other method to disable the GWs on runtime using other arguments like duid or socket ? I thought about using probing for this, since it will disable automatically the GWs with non-existent socket, but not all my clients support probing, so it isn't feasible. Thanks in advance

2 5

UAC ha1 password
by Alexandru Covalschi 28 Aug '19

28 Aug '19

Hello, I'm trying to make Kamailio to SIP register on a remote server. However storing plaintext password looks very unsecure. Is there a possibility to store password for uac module using ha1 hash instead of the plaintext password? I see there's a row for it in the database, but in the source code it's not used and it seems i can't neither use it in db neither set up in-memory as avp. Maybe there's a workaround to directly access the in-memory uac registration htable? ________________________________ Regards, Alexandru Covalschi VoIP Engineer and System Administrator tel: +37367367850

3 5

controlling presence with new module `pua_json`
by bill＠novatrope.us 28 Aug '19

28 Aug '19

Hi all: I am trying to use the procedure for setting BLF lights described in https://blog.voipxswitch.com/2018/02/22/kamailio-controlling-presence-with-… WIthout success. My configuration is 1 Grandstream GXP2130 phone behind a NAT on a public IP. (IPP in example below) Kamailio is running on public IP (IPK in example) listening on port 50060 The command I am sending: curl -d '{"Call-ID":"1020101@<IPP>","Event-Category":"presence","Event-Name":"update","Event-Package":"dialog","Expires":"3600","To":"sip:1020108@<IPK>:50060","To-User":"1020108","To-Realm":"<IPK>:50060","From":"sip:1020101@<IPP>","From-User":"1020101","From-Realm":"<IPP>","State":"Confirmed"}' http://localhost:8080/presence/ {"Call-ID":"1020101@<IPP>","Event-Category":"presence","Event-Name":"update","Event-Package":"dialog","Expires":"3600","To":"sip:1020108@<IPK>:50060","To-User":"1020108","To-Realm":"<IPK>:50060","From":"sip:1020101@<IPP>","From-User":"1020101","From-Realm":"<IPP>","State":"Confirmed"} Kamailio appears to be processing the command OK, so I think I am just not setting it up properly> Anybody having any luck with this procedure, let me know how you are getting it to work. Bill

2 1

[tm-local-request] usage
by Duarte Rocha 28 Aug '19

28 Aug '19

Greetings, Does "event_route[tm:local-request]" works like onsend route ? I'm having some problems and i'm using local-request to debug and i found this on the documentation : "Executed after the tm module has sent a local generated, transaction stateful request." I'm logging all the requests that go through this route. Is this really the last place before kamailio send the request? If the request is logged here, is there anything more in kamailio that can stop the request (pipelimit, etc) ? If a packet gets logged on this route does that mean that it was already sent? Best Regards, Duarte Rocha

3 4

Kamailio 4.4.7 - LCR modules
by Laura 28 Aug '19

28 Aug '19

Hi guys, on our enviromet we have 130+ gateway configured over the LCR_gw tables. when we try to reload it.. we get error.. "Aug 28 09:40:36 vm-nextaitz-02 /usr/sbin/kamailio[3800]: ERROR: lcr [lcr_mod.c:1511]: reload_tables(): too many gateways" We reached some top values.. how can we modify it ? Regards

2 2

Dispatcher - FQDN with multiple IPs
by Sergiu Pojoga 27 Aug '19

27 Aug '19

Hi ppl, The problem I'm facing is that function *ds_is_from_list* seems to return false when a gateway's address is a FQDN that resolves into multiple IP addresses (I'm talking about A records), consequently in-dialog requests like BYE and re-Invites get blocked since they don't pass the *ds_is_from_list* validation. Am I missing some parameter or something? Thanks, --Sergiu

3 3

RFC: about sl and tm local-response event routes
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 27 Aug '19

27 Aug '19

Hello, just discovered what I consider to be an inconsistency in naming and behaviour for event_route blocks for local-request and local-response and starting a discussion here to see how to move on. The event_route[tm:local-request] is executed before sending there local generated request out (allowing also to change its content, drop, etc...). This event route is quite popular event route used when the local generated requests need to be checked or updates. The event_route[tm:local-response] is executed after the response is sent out, obviously no possibility to change anymore the content. I haven't checked the code for event_route[sl:local-response], but based on commit message should be the same. I haven't used the local-response so far at all, today after a discussion on sr-users I wanted to enable kemi callback for tm:local-response and I noticed that behaviour in the code, even I expected to be like local-request (before sending out). I am not sure how much used are the event routes for tm:local-response and sl:local-response, I haven't seen any questions about them so far on mailing lists, that's why I am asking here if would make sense to rename them like tm:local-response-sent and sl:local-response-sent to properly reflect when they are executed. I am expecting that they are very few used so far, so no big head ache with upgrades and bringing some consistency around (this change to be part of next major release). It can stay like now with proper documentation, however in the future if one want and event route for local responses before being sent out, there will be more confusion, imo ... Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

4 5

Too many hops 483 - unable to setup call
by Jack R 27 Aug '19

27 Aug '19

Hi, I installed Kamailio SIP server: Following article: https://github.com/open5gs/nextepc/blob/master/docs/_docs/guide/04-setting-… By following step # 12 (as per above article) when we initiate the call we get - Too many hops 483 Created two user earlier: $ kamctl add test testpasswd $ kamctl add test2 testpasswd syslog show: Aug 27 09:36:50 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56286]: ERROR: nathelper [nathelper.c:780]: add_contact_alias_0(): failed to get contact uri Aug 27 09:36:50 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56286]: ERROR: ims_registrar_pcscf [save.c:268]: save_pending(): No contact headers Aug 27 09:36:50 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56275]: ERROR: <script>: REGISTER (sip:test1@139.54.102.135 (139.54.102.135:5060) to sip:test1@139.54.102.135, ee24f837b04b07334e25befe81217f8f(a)45.45.0.16) Aug 27 09:36:50 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56275]: ERROR: nathelper [nathelper.c:780]: add_contact_alias_0(): failed to get contact uri Aug 27 09:36:50 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56275]: ERROR: ims_registrar_pcscf [save.c:268]: save_pending(): No contact headers Aug 27 09:36:50 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56276]: ERROR: <script>: REGISTER (sip:test1@139.54.102.135 (139.54.102.135:5060) to sip:test1@139.54.102.135, ee24f837b04b07334e25befe81217f8f(a)45.45.0.16) Aug 27 09:37:05 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56278]: ERROR: <script>: REGISTER (sip:test1@139.54.102.135 (45.45.0.16:42965) to sip:test1@139.54.102.135, 04e06b6352f7a2b8f97c1a3733b3334a(a)45.45.0.16) Aug 27 09:37:05 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56278]: ERROR: ims_registrar_pcscf [save.c:339]: save_pending(): Will save pending contact without security parameters Aug 27 09:37:05 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56374]: ERROR: <script>: Diameter: AAR failed on subscription to signalling Server IP 139.54.102.135 where Kamailio is installed, UE IP address 45.45.0.16, 45.45.0.1 Followed this https://www.kamailio.org/wiki/tutorials/faq/main#why_the_sip_requests_are_r… Thought to test using SIPp - installed and ran default command: ./sipp –sn uac 127.0.0.1 and ./sipp –sn uac 139.54.102.135 Aug 27 08:51:32 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56295]: ERROR: <script>: INVITE (sip:sipp@139.54.102.135:5061 (139.54.102.135:5061) to sip:service@139.54.102.135:5060, 2-60232(a)139.54.102.135) Aug 27 08:51:32 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56295]: ERROR: ims_ipsec_pcscf [cmd.c:507]: ipsec_forward(): Contact doesn't exist The user sipp and service does'nt exist Added user: kamctl add sipp testpasswd kamctl add service testpasswd Still same error: Aug 27 10:52:17 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56289]: ERROR: ims_ipsec_pcscf [cmd.c:507]: ipsec_forward(): Contact doesn't exist Aug 27 10:52:17 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[56284]: ERROR: <script>: INVITE (sip:sipp@139.54.102.135:5061 (139.54.102.135:5061) to sip:service@139.54.102.135:5060, 977-61357(a)139.54.102.135) Please advise. Thanks and Regards.

1 1

kamailio stop registering agents
by Gaurav Bmotra 27 Aug '19

27 Aug '19

hi i m using kamailio 5.1,,, on ubuntu 18.4 installed form source .... after few days it stop registering client to kamailio.... it resolved after restart service ... same after few day loges ---- --------------------- kamailio.service - LSB: Start the Kamailio SIP proxy server Loaded: loaded (/etc/init.d/kamailio; generated) Active: active (exited) since Wed 2019-08-21 08:07:44 UTC; 5 days ago Docs: man:systemd-sysv-generator(8) Process: 1936 ExecStart=/etc/init.d/kamailio start (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS) Aug 21 08:07:44 talk /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[1969]: INFO: <core> [core/cfg/cfg_ctx.c:595]: cfg_set_now(): tls.low_mem_threshold2 has been changed to Aug 21 08:07:44 talk /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[1969]: INFO: <core> [main.c:2636]: main(): processes (at least): 27 - shm size: 67108864 - pkg size: 838 Aug 21 08:07:44 talk /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[1969]: ERROR: dispatcher [dispatcher.c:813]: ds_warn_fixup(): failover functions used, but required AVP Aug 21 08:07:44 talk /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[1969]: INFO: <core> [core/udp_server.c:153]: probe_max_receive_buffer(): SO_RCVBUF is initially 212992 Aug 21 08:07:44 talk /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[1969]: INFO: <core> [core/udp_server.c:205]: probe_max_receive_buffer(): SO_RCVBUF is finally 425984 Aug 21 08:07:44 talk /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[1969]: ERROR: <core> [core/tcp_main.c:2850]: tcp_init(): bind(c, 0x7fbabac2c1f4, 16) on 172.31.35.49:509 Aug 21 08:07:44 talk /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[1969]: INFO: <core> [core/sctp_core.c:53]: sctp_core_destroy(): SCTP API not initialized Aug 21 08:07:44 talk kamailio[1936]: * already running Aug 21 08:07:44 talk kamailio[1936]: ...done. Aug 21 08:07:44 talk systemd[1]: Started LSB: Start the Kamailio SIP proxy server. plz help thank you -- *Regards:* Gaurav Kumar

3 3

Re: [SR-Users] [sr-dev] Failed to catch some reply message with reply_route block
by Henning Westerholt 27 Aug '19

27 Aug '19

(moved the discussion to user list) Hello Salah, I see the this output in the log message: 6(26) INFO: <script>: on_reply_route [SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 172.32.0.6;rport=5060;received=172.32.0.6;branch=z9hG4bKe68a.99dc492fe74dcfe1017828521a5fa362.0 2(22) INFO: <script>: on_reply_route [SIP/2.0 100 Trying Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 172.32.0.6;rport=5060;received=172.32.0.6;branch=z9hG4bK178a.79cddb135aabfc42736fd9e9fd826ba8.0 and so on.. So you are seeing the replies correctly, or I wrong? Cheers, Henning Am 22.08.19 um 21:29 schrieb Salah Ahmed: Hello Henning, We already added xlog in the onreply_route and found all messages in between kamailio and UAS. The attached log files in first email has those logs. If any other specific log needed I am here to provide them. Thanks, Salah On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 2:24 PM Henning Westerholt <hw(a)skalatan.de<mailto:hw@skalatan.de>> wrote: Hello Salah, ok, see if you are able to output some easy log with "xlog" in this route, to make sure there is no cfg problem somewhere. Cheers, Henning Am 22.08.19 um 21:15 schrieb Salah Ahmed: Hello Henning, Thanks for quick reply, We armed the t_on_reply just before t_relay() in the route block. t_on_reply("LOGRPL"); if (!t_relay()) { sl_reply_error(); } Thanks, Salah On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 2:03 PM Henning Westerholt <hw(a)skalatan.de<mailto:hw@skalatan.de>> wrote: Hello Salah, the replies are going from the UAS to the UAC over Kamailo as a proxy, with the exception of the hop-by-hop 100. So you should see the 200 OK in the Kamailio in reply_route and onreply_route. Maybe you can check if you armed the onreply_route with t_on_reply for the INVITE routing. Cheers, Henning Am 22.08.19 um 19:50 schrieb Salah Ahmed: Hello, We facing an issue on capturing sip message in Kamailio(Version: 5.2.3). The scenario is very simple. UAC Kamailio UAS |--------INVITE--------->| | | |-------INVITE------->| | |<------100 Trying----| |<-------100 Trying------| | | |<------200 Ok--------| |<-------200 Ok----------| | In this simple scenario, we can't catch any reply messages in between the Kamailio and UAC. We have tried reply_route, onreply_route, and onsend_route. But no one work to grep that reply on that side. onsend_route was bad try as its only for forwarded reply message. Is there any other magic to capture those replies. A debug=3 log message attached here. Thanks, Salah _______________________________________________ Kamailio (SER) - Development Mailing List sr-dev(a)lists.kamailio.org<mailto:sr-dev@lists.kamailio.org> https://lists.kamailio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev -- Henning Westerholt - https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services - https://skalatan.de/services -- Henning Westerholt - https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services - https://skalatan.de/services -- Henning Westerholt - https://skalatan.de/blog/ Kamailio services - https://skalatan.de/services

4 11

exit stop procesing or not after a conditional? based on "exit" core docs seems does not explain behaviour
by PICCORO McKAY Lenz 26 Aug '19

26 Aug '19

in my kamailio-asterisk integration i have a exit after the authentication logic, BUT; there's another conditional after the "exit" sentence, so my ask, if there's a exit in that piece of code .. that next conditional will not be executed? Docs seems said "stop execution of script" so all the rest of the logic in file will not be routed? The documentation seems does not explain in good behavior what happened or the kamailio-asterisk wiki page does not have good explanations for that! it's that an error? https://www.kamailio.org/wiki/cookbooks/4.3.x/core#exit - - ``` if (from_uri==myself) {#!ifdef WITH_ASTERISK if (!proxy_authorize("$fd", "sipusers")) {#!else if (!proxy_authorize("$fd", "subscriber")) {#!endif proxy_challenge("$fd", "0"); exit; } if (is_method("PUBLISH")) { if ($au!=$tU) { sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); exit; } } else { if ($au!=$fU) { sl_send_reply("403","Forbidden auth ID"); exit; } } consume_credentials(); # caller authenticated } else { # caller is not local subscriber, then check if it calls # a local destination, otherwise deny, not an open relay here if (!uri==myself) { sl_send_reply("403","Not relaying"); exit; } } } #!endif return; } ``` 8:52 am Lenz McKAY Gerardo (PICCORO) http://qgqlochekone.blogspot.com

2 1

reply cannot be forwarded - no 2nd via
by Ryan McEvoy 25 Aug '19

25 Aug '19

Hello, I have been having an issue using kamailio to load balance to a SIP/MRCP server. I believe that the issue actually lies with the reply being sent from the final recipient, but I wanted to be sure that I understood the problem and to see if there were any possible solutions within Kamailio. I am using the dispatcher module to dispatch SIP INVITES to media resources, in this case I am just using a single host in a single dispatcher group. The configuration that I have has worked just fine for other SIP/MRCP servers, which is why I think the issue is with this target in particular. The INVITE is routed correctly and contains the headers that it should. The invite comes originally from a Freeswitch, arrives at Kamailio, who should then dispatch to a host in the group. x.x.x.x:4901 is Kamailio x.x.x.x:8090 is Freeswitch y.y.y.y:8000 is the final target This is the invite, as received by the final target after dispatched via Kamailio INVITE sip: x.x.x.x:4901 SIP/2.0 Record-Route: <sip: x.x.x.x:4901;transport=tcp;lr> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP x.x.x.x:4901;branch=z9hG4bK3a9a.7f9a4b588cd75108cfea9a2bd9ffa829.0;i=3 Via: SIP/2.0/TCP x.x.x.x:8090;branch=z9hG4bKStXp06Sv7jU7S Max-Forwards: 69 From: <sip: x.x.x.x:8090>;tag=4gHgNcNUDjvFQ To: <sip: x.x.x.x:4901> Call-ID: 6f2a0e9c-3f9e-1238-2aa9-005056854777 CSeq: 8692231 INVITE User-Agent: tts Allow: INVITE, ACK, BYE, CANCEL, OPTIONS, PRACK, MESSAGE, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, REFER, UPDATE Supported: timer, 100rel Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Disposition: session Content-Length: 281 v=0 o=IPSoft 3367790083977298880 2789991278648035021 IN IP4 x.x.x.x s=- c=IN IP4 x.x.x.x t=0 0 m=application 9 TCP/MRCPv2 1 a=setup:active a=connection:existing a=resource:speechsynth a=cmid:1 m=audio 32038 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000 a=recvonly a=mid:1 The reply that the server sends back appears to be missing a second Via header, which is preventing Kamailio for routing it correctly (based on the error message from core/forward.c) This is the reply sent by the target destination SIP/2.0 200 OK Via: SIP/2.0/TCP x.x.x.x:8090;branch=z9hG4bKStXp06Sv7jU7S To: <sip: x.x.x.x:4901>;tag=ndszib3k From: <sip: x.x.x.x:8090>;tag=4gHgNcNUDjvFQ Call-ID: 6f2a0e9c-3f9e-1238-2aa9-005056854777 CSeq: 8692231 INVITE Contact: "Voiceware MRCP Server" <sip:vwmrcp@ y.y.y.y:8000;transport=tcp> Content-Type: application/sdp Content-Length: 324 v=0 o=- 1566492047 1566492047 IN IP4 y.y.y.y s=Voiceware MRCP Server 2.15.0.7. Dec 28 2018 c=IN IP4 y.y.y.y t=0 0 m=application 8002 TCP/MRCPv2 1 a=channel:12951125463@speechsynth a=connection:new a=setup:passive a=cmid:1 m=audio 30158 RTP/AVP 0 a=rtpmap:0 pcmu/8000 a=sendonly a=ptime:20 a=mid:1 It is correct that there should still be a 2nd Via header in the 200 OK reply from the target host, right? If so, is there anything else that can be done in Kamailio to handle this, or is this mrcp server simply not complying properly with SIP? There’s no funky natting between these hosts or anything like that. Thanks in advance!

2 1

Wrong ACL to Provider kamailio+asterisk+uac
by Zhan Bazarov 25 Aug '19

25 Aug '19

Hello! Please, is it possible to change from/to headers in ACK message to provider? this is exactly our case, please, look it when u get a chance. http://sip-router.1086192.n5.nabble.com/Wrong-ACK-to-Provider-td130050.html…

2 13

set_rtpengine_set question
by Juha Heinanen 24 Aug '19

24 Aug '19

When set_rtpengine_set() is called with two parameters before rtpengine_offer(), e.g. set_rtpengine_set("1", "2"); rtpengine_offer(); it was not clear to me from rtpengine README, if the sets need to reversed when set_rtpengine_set() is called before rtpengine_answer(), i.e., set_rtpengine_set("2", "1"); rtpengine_answer(); or can the order of the sets be the same as it was in case of rtpengine_offer()? -- Juha

1 1

Dealing with optional SRTP
by Mark Boyce 24 Aug '19

24 Aug '19

Hi all (Using Kamailio + RTPEngine, both current stable versions) Just wondering what current best practice is for dealing with “optional SRTP” such as those generated by Yealink devices. (I know this breaks the RFC but lots of things seem to use this method.) Where the device SDP message looks like; m=audio 50004 RTP/AVP 8 97 101 a=crypto:1 AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_80 inline:uhJOWOXPuzMeBmrbx2wAKohuveAvZeMEJTzfE7GT a=crypto:2 AES_CM_128_HMAC_SHA1_32 inline:yF+EhR3RtxSDCGtLCnEAl3Zrdut4b8cfFQP+hFqf An unencrypted RTP/AVP media line but with crypto lines showing that the device will support SRTP encryption but it is not mandatory. The system of offer SRTP and try and catch on not supported/acceptable here fail feels a little clumsy and relies on how gracefully the device sends “not acceptable here”. I’m wondering if I just short cut it and say that if a device offers a acceptable crypto line then Kamailio sends back a SAVP response. Naturally this question is then closely followed by how to do optional SRTP invites originating from Kamailio without just directly manipulating lines? Feels like there should be an RTPEngine setting for Optional? RTP/AVP+SAVP ? Thoughts? Mark

1 0

Kamailio as an Outbound Proxy - Strange Sip Flow
by Diogo Hartmann 23 Aug '19

23 Aug '19

Hello Kamailio experts, We have a Kamailio as outbound proxy in front of Asterisks PjSIP. There is a strange behavior after 200 OK: - ACK comes from Asterisk Public IP instead of coming from the internal IP address. - BYE can not be processed (404 not here) SNGREP print attached. Has anyone ever experienced this? I can provide more information if needed, just let me know what info. Thanks! Diogo Hartmann

2 5

Cant finish call
by przeqpiciel 23 Aug '19

23 Aug '19

Hi all, I am totally new with Kamailio but i have needs to build small cluster of Asterisk. Right now I could succesfully register to asterisk via kamailio and even make a call to hear tt-weasels but Asterisk cant close call My infrastructure diagram is here http://www.asciidraw.com/#Draw6816041626716434245/903175935 This is what probably I need is to know how to tell to Asterisk that send BYE to private IP of Kamailio instead public IP of Kamailio, am I right ?

1 0

TCP: Strange Device Behaviour
by Carsten Bock 23 Aug '19

23 Aug '19

Hi, I have a device here, which does some sort of strange things: I have SIP Message, e.g. with a length of 1100 Bytes and the devices adds "0" to the end to meet the MTU of the network (for a single TCP frame), some sort of TCP padding. The following TCP Frame contains only the next message. Looking at the trace in Wireshark, sngrep or similar, all of them try to re-assemble the next message in the TCP stream, but however don't decode them as SIP due to to first couple of zero's in the message. Looking at Kamailio, it seems not to have any issues with this and decodes/parses the message properly (they show up on Homer properly); however it also forwards the message INCLUDING the first couple of zero's even on UDP. To make it complitely irritating, the phone itself would ignore such packets, if we would forward them to the phone with starting zeros. Has anyone seen anything like this and is it standards-compliant? Any proper and easy way to get rid of the starting "zero's" from a message before forwarding these messages? I could always "hack" something into src/core/tcp_read.c, but I wonder if there is already a proper way? Any ideas anyone? Thanks, Carsten -- Carsten Bock I Managing Director ng-voice GmbH Millerntorplatz 1 I 20359 Hamburg I Germany www.ng-voice.com Mobile +49 (0)179-20 21 244 I Direct +49 (0)40-52 47 593-40 I Fax +49 (0)40-52 47 593-99 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg Registergericht: Amtsgericht Hamburg, HRB 120189 Geschäftsführer: Carsten Bock, Dr. David Bachmann Ust-ID: DE279344284 Hier finden Sie unsere handelsrechtlichen Pflichtangaben: http://www.ng-voice.com/imprint/

1 0

About STIR/SHAKEN - Caller Identity
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 23 Aug '19

23 Aug '19

Hello, at couple of events I participated during the past few months, I was asked about support of STIR/SHAKEN (caller identity authentication/verification), which is a hot topic these days at least in USA, aiming to combat "fraudulent" robo-calling. Therefore I thought of share some details with everyone in the community about the state in Kamailio, writing to both devs and users, the information being relevant for everyone. We already have the (related) module named auth_identity, available since 2008 (iirc): - https://www.kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules/auth_identity.html But it implements the previous iteration of the specs for caller identity, respectively RFC 4474: - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4474 However, that RFC is obsoleted by 8224 (the latest core specs for STIR/SHAKEN): - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8224 Then, there are also RFCs 8225 and 8226 to add to the core specs. Should anyone be interested to implement STIR/SHAKEN specs in a modules, I would suggest to start from auth_identity -- might not be much work to update it to become conform with latest specs (a new module can be created, of course, even when starting from auth_identity). However, these specs are about signing the SIP request (the INVITE) with special PKI certificate. It can be done easily with embedded scripts such as Lua or Python (inline execution in native kamailio.cfg or using kemi scripts). At Kamailio World 2019, one of the participants I discussed with told me they already implemented using Lua. That's it for a starting point, if anyone wants to discuss more, just reply to sr-users and add your comments or ask the questions. If someone wants to go ahead and work on a C module, announce yourself to avoid duplicate work of others, and use sr-dev if you need assistance on module development. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

2 2

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