- sr-users - kamailio.org

Kamailio & queue
by Marino Mileti 02 Oct '14

02 Oct '14

Hi, Is it possible to use kamailio to manage a very simple queue? All calls inbound go directly in queue and then the system to to extract calls and route to agent. A very simple call center. I've seen that there's a mohqueue module...is there any conf example? Many thanks

3 2

event_route[core:receive-parse-error] question
by Julia Boudniatsky 02 Oct '14

02 Oct '14

Hello, I try to use event_route[core:receive-parse-error] in 4.1.6 event_route[core:receive-parse-error] { xlog("L_WARN", "Event-parse-error: $rm from $avp(inc_carrier)/n$mb/n"); } When core parse error occurs , *log message is not printed*. What is wrong? Thank you, Julia

2 3

Segfault in 4.1.6
by David Wilson 02 Oct '14

02 Oct '14

Hi all, I’ve had Kamailio running nicely for nearly a year, but have hit a segfault twice since upgrading to 4.1.6 earlier this week. The log shows: Oct 2 11:28:03 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[1222]: : <core> [pass_fd.c:293]: receive_fd(): ERROR: receive_fd: EOF on 23 Oct 2 11:28:03 localhost kernel: [11259.904645] kamailio[1206]: segfault at 58 ip 00007fa56fba0f86 sp 00007fffea594ca0 error 4 in dialog.so[7fa56fb63000+54000] Oct 2 11:28:03 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[1175]: ALERT: <core> [main.c:777]: handle_sigs(): child process 1206 exited by a signal 11 Oct 2 11:28:03 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[1175]: ALERT: <core> [main.c:780]: handle_sigs(): core was not generated Oct 2 11:28:03 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[1175]: INFO: <core> [main.c:792]: handle_sigs(): INFO: terminating due to SIGCHLD Oct 2 11:28:03 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[1220]: INFO: <core> [main.c:843]: sig_usr(): INFO: signal 15 received …. The first two lines above seem to be the important parts. Nothing was logged for about 10s prior to this extract. An earlier instance of the issue showed almost the same details: Oct 1 20:39:12 localhost /usr/sbin/kamailio[1219]: : <core> [pass_fd.c:293]: receive_fd(): ERROR: receive_fd: EOF on 23 Oct 1 20:39:12 localhost kernel: [554502.639227] kamailio[1207]: segfault at 58 ip 00007fd62c5c6f86 sp 00007fffd77c9890 error 4 in dialog.so[7fd62c589000+54000] I’m trying to catch a core next time it occurs, no core is available yet. Is this a new issue in 4.1.6? Any suggestions about the likely cause? Cheers, Dave.

2 1

Relaying ACK to Asterisk
by Igor Potjevlesch 01 Oct '14

01 Oct '14

Hello, I'm having trouble with this scenario (Kamailio and Asterisk are working on the same server, Asterisk listens on 4060 instead of 5060): the UAC sends an ACK request with the following R-URI: sip:955*95%23@ <sip:955*95%23@%3cIP_ASTERISK/KAMAILIO%3e:4060> <IP_ASTERISK/KAMAILIO>:4060. When I'm doing a capture on loopback interface, I just see an ACK request from IP <IP_ASTERISK/KAMAILIO>:5060 to IP <IP_ASTERISK/KAMAILIO>:5060. So the ACK seems to loop inside Kamailio. What could explain that the good port defined by the UAC is deleted? Regards, Igor.

4 18

rtpengine alt stream question
by Alex Balashov 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hello, I recently encountered SDP attributes that look like this: Media Attribute (a): alt:1 3 : njfxofkg bavpjfxg 192.168.2.59 41978 Media Attribute (a): alt:2 2 : fpukfyaj dqmiarjx 192.168.111.1 41978 Media Attribute (a): alt:3 1 : euvrwenk jctmhavh 192.168.238.1 41978 I was not familiar with these. However, RFC 4796 says: alt: the media stream is taken from the alternative source. A typical use case for this is an event where the ambient sound is separated from the main sound. The alternative audio stream could be, for example, the sound of a jungle. Another example is the video of a conference room, while the main stream carries the video of the speaker. This is similar to the 'live' role in H.239. RFC 6064 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6064#section-4.4 speaks to this a little as well. This does not really make any clearer to me what these mean in this scenario, and unfortunately I cannot find out from the user. My question is: I assume that rtpengine (both Kamailio and daemon-side) does not support this, correct? Are there any plans to in the future? Can anyone with more experience with video, perhaps, give some insight into the meaning and application of this attribute? Thanks! -- Alex -- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/ Please be kind to the English language: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/232906

1 0

R: Re: R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH
by Marino Mileti 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Unfortunately rtpengine doesn't work in this way. At the end of the calls this is the output log: Final packet stats: Tag 'Fw3D7R0', created 0:41 ago, in dialogue with 'TTPyT~Hdw' Media #1, port 30224 <> 192.168.10.20:7078 , 540 p, 92880 b, 0 e Media #1, port 30225 <> 192.168.10.20:7079 (RTCP), 3 p, 324 b, 0 e Media #2, port 30256 <> 192.168.10.20:9078 , 0 p, 0 b, 0 e Media #2, port 30257 <> 192.168.10.20:9079 (RTCP), 3 p, 264 b, 0 e Tag 'qWE6Gsh', created 0:41 ago, in dialogue with 'TTPyT~Hdw' Media #1, port 30140 <> 192.168.10.50:7078 , 533 p, 91068 b, 0 e Media #1, port 30141 <> 192.168.10.50:7079 (RTCP), 5 p, 444 b, 0 e Media #2, port 30170 <> 192.168.10.50:9078 , 0 p, 0 b, 0 e Media #2, port 30171 <> 192.168.10.50:9079 (RTCP), 1 p, 88 b, 0 e Tag 'TTPyT~Hdw', created 0:41 ago, in dialogue with 'Fw3D7R0' Media #1, port 30206 <> 172.20.11.208:7078 , 1070 p, 183736 b, 0 e Media #1, port 30207 <> 172.20.11.208:7079 (RTCP), 4 p, 496 b, 0 e Media #2, port 30240 <> 172.20.11.208:9078 , 4188 p, 1435946 b, 0 e Media #2, port 30241 <> 172.20.11.208:9079 (RTCP), 4 p, 400 b, 0 e 192.168.10.x clients are natted..it seems that rtpengine open 2 ports (for example video) for each receiver (30256 & 30170) and 1 port for the caller (30240). But on the INVITE of Kamailio only video port 30170 is offered to receivers, instead on caller side there are 2 distinct 183s message that offer 30190 & 30240. It's a little bit strange because some of these port doesn't appear in the log of rtpengine. At the end I can see video only on one receiver I don't know if the problem is on Kamailio (rtpproxy-ng module) or in the rtpengine :) > Without rtpproxy: > > - A offers port a1,a2 (audio video) in INVITE to B,C (in case of no natted > client so no needs of rtpproxy) > - B offers port b1,b2 (183) > - C offers port c1,c2 (182). > - A starts to send audio/video RTP to B on port b1,b2 > - A starts to send audio/video RTP to C on port c1,c2 > > With rtpproxy: > > - A offers port a1,a2 (audio video) in INVITE to Kamailio.... > - Kamailio contact rtpproxy because B&C are natted clients > - rtpproxy check callid and offer offers port k1,k2.... > - Kamailio sends INVITE to B offering k1,k2 > - Kamailio sends INVITE to C offering k1,k2 > - B offers port b1,b2 (183) > - C offers port c1,c2 (182) > - Kamailio sends 183 to A (for B leg) offering p1,p2 > - Kamailio sends 183 to A (for B leg) offering p3,p4 > - A starts to stream on p1,p2,p3,p4 but only one receiver can see the video > (B or C depends who will be the first:)) > > I don't know if it depends on that B & C receives same ports; i don't know > if rtpproxy is able to "duplicate" stream received from A to all "receiver" If A sends two streams, there is no need for duplication. A sending to p1 should be forwarded to B (b1) and A sending to p3 should be forwarded to C (c1). Both should be able to receive media sent by A. I believe that's what rtpengine does (but I haven't tested it). The reverse direction might be more confusing, but a final 200 OK with SDP should fix that. cheers _______________________________________________ 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

2 1

Call Group versus MAX_BRANCHES limit
by João Vitor Arruda 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hi folks, I have a question related with the limited number of branches being 12 in config.h #define MAX_BRANCHES 12 /*!< maximum number of branches per transaction */ I am trying to implement a Call Group that consists in trying each member of the group (that can result in a parallel forking when lookup() is used) in sequence (similar to serial forking). Currently I have written code that is similar to the one described here: http://www.kamailio.org/dokuwiki/dokuphp/tutorials:avpops#serial_forking The only difference is that for each member I call lookup() and then in the failure_route(), I pull the next member from the stack and call lookup() again. The code works fine when used for groups with less than 12 members. However, call groups with 12 or more members fails as I can never reach remaining extensions once MAX_BRANCHES limit is reached. I've tried another approach using the functions described here: http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.1.x/modules/tm.html#tm.serial_forking but it too uses a new branch for every group member until the 12 limit is reached out. I also tried to use the functions "remove_branch(index)" and "clear_branches()" (both of which are poorly documented. In fact the only reference I ever found for these functions was here: http://www.kamailio.org/wiki/features/new-in-3.2.x#functions). Unfortunately, I wasn't able to prevent the MAX_BRANCHES limit from being reached. Ultimately, my goal is to have a limitless Call Group. Do you have any suggestions? (other than increasing the hard coded MAX_BRANCHES limit) Thank you, Joao Arruda

3 2

Re: [SR-Users] Kamailio with Jitsi - Presence trouble
by Gaurav Kumar 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hi,I ran the code on my server (as Daniel suggested) and then tried to send message from one user to other but no traffic was detected.ngrep d any qt W byline "sip" port 5060interface: anyfilter: (ip or ip6) and ( port 5060 )match: sipAlso, after I tried to install the PRESENCE module and having restarted the systems today, I noticed that the response that I am getting on Jitsi is "403 Not Relaying" and not "403 Not Allowed". I am not sure what caused the change.I hope someone can help me figure it out.Cheers!Gaurav Original message From:"DanielConstantin Mierla"< miconda(a)gmail.com >Date: 30 Sep 14 16:19:30Subject: Re: [SRUsers] Kamailio with Jitsi Presence troubleTo: ; "Kamailio (SER) Users Mailing List"Hello,you should grab the SIP traffic on kamailio server and send it to the mailing list. In this way we can spot why you get the 403 Not Allowed. You can use:ngrep d any qt W byline "sip" port 5060Cheers, DanielOn 30/09/14 08:50, Gaurav Kumar wrote:Hello all!I tried sendin g this earlier too but since I was not subscribed tothe mailing list, it bounced back.I am trying to setup a secure videoconferencing setup for mysmall office. After a lot of convincing, my bosses have allowed meto create a setup and have given me a live IP. I have used it on aUbuntu 12.04 setup and want to setup a SIP server for very fewusers (less than 10, at most) to use it through Jitsi. I am tryingto follow the tutorials available at: http://kb.asipto.com/kamailio:skypelikeserviceinlessthanonehour&https://www… am able to log into Jitsi on independent machines, both behindand without a firewall. But the trouble I am facing is that theusers do not appear online to each other. If I try to send a textmessage nonetheless, I get the "403 Not allowed" error.At first, I tried the config file for Kamailio provided on thefirst link. It had some problems due to it being an old versionand the config file on the 2nd link help ed me out. I suspect thereis some problem with the PRESENCE module but I do not know whatsince it does not give any error whatsoever. I added the "#!defineWITHPRESENCE" line and installed the Presence module but to noavail. My current kamailio.cfg file can be seen at: http://pastebin.com/bZJxVLfL(I have hidden my live IP in the text).My current /etc/kamailio/kamctlrc file can be seen at: http://pastebin.com/tV7Z9E8eI can upload the logs/other file content as needed. I am a n00bfor Kamailio so you will have to be patient with me.Please help me out here. I have been after it for almost a weeknow. Cheers!GauravDear srusers! Get Yourself a cool, short @in.com Email ID now! SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) srusers mailing list srusers(a)lists.siprouter.org http://lists.siprouter.org/cgibin/mailman/listinfo/srusersDanielConstantin Mierla http://twitter.com/#!/miconda http://www.linkedin.com/in/micondaGet Yourself a cool, short @in.com Email ID now!

1 0

Kamailio with Jitsi - Presence trouble
by Gaurav Kumar 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hello all!I tried sending this earlier too but since I was not subscribed to the mailing list, it bounced back.I am trying to setup a secure videoconferencing setup formy small office. After a lot of convincing, my bosses have allowed meto create a setup and have given me a live IP. I have used it on aUbuntu 12.04 setup and want to setup a SIP server for very few users(less than 10, at most) to use it through Jitsi. I am trying to followthe tutorials available at:http://kb.asipto.com/kamailio:skypelikeserviceinlessthanonehour&https://… able to log into Jitsi on independent machines, both behind andwithout a firewall. But the trouble I am facing is that the users do notappear online to each other. If I try to send a text messagenonetheless, I get the "403 Not allowed" error.At first, I triedthe config file for Kamailio provided on the first link. It had someproblems due to it being an old version and the config fil e on the 2ndlink helped me out. I suspect there is some problem with the PRESENCEmodule but I do not know what since it does not give any errorwhatsoever. I added the "#!define WITHPRESENCE" line and installed thePresence module but to no avail. My current kamailio.cfg file can be seen at: http://pastebin.com/bZJxVLfL(I have hidden my live IP in the text).My current /etc/kamailio/kamctlrc file can be seen at: http://pastebin.com/tV7Z9E8eI can upload the logs/other file content as needed. I am a n00b for Kamailio so you will have to be patient with me.Please help me out here. I have been after it for almost a week now. Cheers!GauravDear srusers! Get Yourself a cool, short @in.com Email ID now!

2 1

Uri transformations stopped working after upgrade from 3.3 to 4.1.6.
by Julia Boudniatsky 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hello, Some Uri transformations stopped working after upgrade from 3.3 to 4.1.6. *To: <sip:01412127775678;cic=012;csel=noind@10.25.153.150:5060 <http://noind@10.25.153.150:5060>;user=phone>* *In v3.3* $tu({uri.params}) return: cic=012;csel=noind $tu({uri.param,cic}) return: 012 *In v4.1.6* $tu({uri.params}) return : user=phone $tu({uri.param,cic}) return : Best regards, Julia

2 3

Re: [SR-Users] Questions about multiple contacts in kamailio
by Federico Cabiddu 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hi, you can achieve this by using the flag 0x04 when calling save() function from registrar module: http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/stable/modules/registrar.html#idp1965144 Regards, Federico On 30 Sep 2014 10:54, "qw" <applemax82(a)163.com> wrote: Hi, I have one question about contact in kamailio. Sometimes, one user may register multiple contacts in kamailio server, where contacts are represented as ip:port. For example, the user registers at first, and lose connection to the internet later. After one minute, the user connects the internet again, but can't get service from kamailio server. Then the user need to registers with new contact. Now there are two contacts in kamailio, i.e. old one and new one. How can I remove the old contact, and make sure there is only one contact in kamailio server. Looking forward to your help! B.R. andrew _______________________________________________ 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

Questions about multiple contacts in kamailio
by qw 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hi, I have one question about contact in kamailio. Sometimes, one user may register multiple contacts in kamailio server, where contacts are represented as ip:port. For example, the user registers at first, and lose connection to the internet later. After one minute, the user connects the internet again, but can't get service from kamailio server. Then the user need to registers with new contact. Now there are two contacts in kamailio, i.e. old one and new one. How can I remove the old contact, and make sure there is only one contact in kamailio server. Looking forward to your help! B.R. andrew

1 0

Kamailio -PSTN Gateway
by Zaka Ul Isam 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hello Folks: Please help with above, I have browsed and tried various suggestions on this list without much luck! I think problem can be reduced to three questions ;) 1: Apart from DEFINE WITH PSTN directive, do I need certain modules to be compiled? (DIALPLAN, CARRIERROUTE, LCR aso) If yes, then we ought to put up a list of modules required for each task/ activity..... 2: How Kamailio core decides the call routing? i.e: based on dialed digits as specified in dialplan . # - update the condition to match your dialing rules for PSTN routing if(!($rU=~"^(\+|00355)[0][4-9]{3,20}$")) return; && #!ifdef WITH_PSTN # PSTN GW Routing # # - pstn.gw_ip: valid IP or hostname as string value, example: # pstn.gw_ip = "10.0.0.101" desc "My PSTN GW Address" # # - by default is empty to avoid misrouting pstn.gw_ip = "10.1.6" desc "PSTN GW Address" pstn.gw_port = "5080" desc "PSTN GW Port" #!endif 3: If Kamailio is listening on say wlan0 interface 10.42.0.1:5060 (Ubuntu HOT SPOT) can it route to PSTN Gateway/ Softswitch on P2P1 (Eth0) without Bridging? Put another way, does kernel route towards the specified interface or Kamailio is capable of routing based on active routing cache? Thanking you in advance, Zak ________________________________ Albtelecom & Eagle Mobile invite you to protect together the Environment. Please do not print the e-mail unless really necessary. Albtelecom & Eagle Mobile iu ftojnë të mbrojmë së bashku Mjedisin. Lutemi të mos e printoni këtë komunikim elektronik nëse nuk është vërtet i nevojshëm. ________________________________ This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee/s. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, forwarding, copying or use of any of the information is strictly prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it! Albtelecom makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this message and hereby excludes any liability of any kind for the information contained therein or for the information transmission, reception, storage or use of such in any way whatsoever. The opinions expressed in this message may belong to sender alone and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of Albtelecom. Albtelecom shall bear no liability for any loss or damage caused by software or e-mail viruses. Ky mesazh dhe çdo informacion i transmetuar në përmbajtje te këtij mesazhi është konfidencial dhe është i destinuar vetëm për marrësin e destinuar. Nëse nuk jeni marrësi i destinuar, Ju bëjmë me dije se çdo përhapje, transmetim, kopjim apo përdorim i çdo informacioni është i ndaluar. Nëse e merrni këtë mesazh gabimisht, ju lutem kontaktoni urgjentisht nisësin e tij dhe fshijeni atë. Albtelecom nuk jep asnjë garanci për saktësinë apo plotësinë e informacionit në përmbajtje të këtij mesazhi dhe nuk mban asnjë përgjegjësi për informacionin e përmbajtur, transmetimin, marrjen, ruajtjen apo përdorimin e tij në çfarëdolloj mënyre. Mendimet e shprehura në këtë mesazh mund t'i përkasin vetë nisësit dhe nuk mund të reflektojnë domosdoshmërisht qëndrimet e Albtelecom. Albtelecom nuk do të mbaje asnjë përgjegjësi për humbje ose dëme te shkaktuara nga programet apo viruset.

2 2

kamailio call limit
by Yuriy Gorlichenko 30 Sep '14

30 Sep '14

Hello. I try to test with SIPp my stak of kamailio->asterisk. I run SIPp with 200 calls/sec and see only 68 at maximum active calls at server. When I set 500 calls/sec with limit 1000 I see 68 active connections again. So when I try test SIPp to asterisk without Kam i see wright maximum of active channels/calls. My question - does Kamailio have limits ffor calls? If no- help me to understand please what is going on with my server. Thanks.

3 4

Re: [SR-Users] R: Re: R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH
by Richard Fuchs 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

On 09/29/14 14:51, Marino Mileti wrote: > Without rtpproxy: > > - A offers port a1,a2 (audio video) in INVITE to B,C (in case of no natted > client so no needs of rtpproxy) > - B offers port b1,b2 (183) > - C offers port c1,c2 (182). > - A starts to send audio/video RTP to B on port b1,b2 > - A starts to send audio/video RTP to C on port c1,c2 > > With rtpproxy: > > - A offers port a1,a2 (audio video) in INVITE to Kamailio.... > - Kamailio contact rtpproxy because B&C are natted clients > - rtpproxy check callid and offer offers port k1,k2.... > - Kamailio sends INVITE to B offering k1,k2 > - Kamailio sends INVITE to C offering k1,k2 > - B offers port b1,b2 (183) > - C offers port c1,c2 (182) > - Kamailio sends 183 to A (for B leg) offering p1,p2 > - Kamailio sends 183 to A (for B leg) offering p3,p4 > - A starts to stream on p1,p2,p3,p4 but only one receiver can see the video > (B or C depends who will be the first:)) > > I don't know if it depends on that B & C receives same ports; i don't know > if rtpproxy is able to "duplicate" stream received from A to all "receiver" If A sends two streams, there is no need for duplication. A sending to p1 should be forwarded to B (b1) and A sending to p3 should be forwarded to C (c1). Both should be able to receive media sent by A. I believe that's what rtpengine does (but I haven't tested it). The reverse direction might be more confusing, but a final 200 OK with SDP should fix that. cheers

1 0

Re: [SR-Users] R: Re: R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH
by Richard Fuchs 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

On 09/29/14 14:23, Marino Mileti wrote: > The problem isn't on 183s but on the multiple INVITE that Kamailio sends to > clients behind rtpengine. Rtpengine open new ports for answer but on INVITE > the rtpengine ports are the same...This happens because for all these > clients the callid is still the same..so for rtpengine there's no > difference...for this reason I can see early media only on one of the > receivers I still don't understand what difference an RTP proxy is supposed to make for the invite. Your offering client only opens one endpoint and sends that out. Without RTP proxy, all receiving clients see the same endpoint and they will all send their early media to that same endpoint. With RTP proxy, the same thing happens. What's the difference? cheers

2 1

Re: [SR-Users] rtpproxy & extra_id_pv
by Richard Fuchs 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

On 09/29/14 14:29, Marino Mileti wrote: > Wow! Do you have an example of how to do that? How I have to modify my > kamailio.conf in order to instructs rtpproxy to user from-tag & to-tag in > this way? You don't have to do anything, tags are already included in all the messages. cheers

1 0

Re: [SR-Users] rtpproxy & extra_id_pv
by Richard Fuchs 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

On 09/29/14 14:08, Marino Mileti wrote: > But with from-tag and To-tag it's possible to instruct rtpengine to generate > new couple of ports for each branch of a call? In the source code of > rtpengine it seems that it check only the callid parameter Yes it will. The call-id is only a vague umbrella under which the from/to tags are collected. All media parameters, ports etc are associated with the tags, and a single call can contain any number of different from/to tags, all with their own separate parameters. cheers

2 1

R: Re: R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH
by Marino Mileti 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

No no. The video will be sent by the caller user to all the callees. I'l try to explain better. My scenario is: - A make a call to a group... B & C are group member...so Kamailio is able to call them in parallel using alias.. - B & C receive the INVITEs & replies with two separate 183 with SDP (in SDP they specified where they are able to receive audio&video) - A receives two 183...& starts to send its RTP video stream to B & C (early media) - Once B or C answers the call the other leg is cancelled.. Everything is working fine but if B & C are behind NAT rtpproxy is activated and during INVITE for B &C rtprpoxy doesn't generate a couple of new ports for each of them but it uses always the same ports. So the only fastest client (B or C) get the video. I don't want to change IP between 183 & 200, i would like only that rtpptoxy sends INVITE for B & C with differents port.Is it possible to implement this scenario or there's some turnarund? ----Messaggio originale---- Da: frank(a)carmickle.com Data: 25-set-2014 16.22 A: "Kamailio (SER) - Users Mailing List"<sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org> Ogg: Re: [SR-Users] R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH On Sep 25, 2014, at 10:09 AM, Marino Mileti <marino.mileti(a)alice.it> wrote:Because I've more than 1 client behind NAT (1,2,3 mobile phones) and I would like to reach all of them in parallel mode. I can't use for all of them same ports because all mobile clients have early media (the receive video media before they answer) I don't understand. Are you saying that you have clients that when they receive an invite sent video with 183? How do you want to composite the video to show to the caller? It is not RFC3261 compliant to change IP and port from 183 to 200. Of course you can reinvite after the 200. Most B2BUAs require you to ignore early media and generate something locally to send to the caller or just send them 180. Maybe if you explain your use case someone can help you. --FC

3 7

Re: [SR-Users] rtpproxy & extra_id_pv
by Richard Fuchs 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

On 09/26/14 16:57, Marino Mileti wrote: > Hello, > >> On Friday 26 September 2014 16:44:44 Marino Mileti wrote: >>> Hi guys, >>> I've seen that setting the parameter extra_id_pv, every branch should >>> be a different callid.. >>> How can i set this parameter? I've tried with : >>> modparam("rtpproxy", "extra_id_pv", "$avp(extra_id)") >>> >>> but in the INVITE message the callid is still the same for all >>> branches. Any suggest? > >> Did you assign a value to $avp(extra) in the script, before calling any of > the rtpproxy functions? > >> Did you use the 'b' parameter in the call to rtpproxy_*() functions? >> -- >> Alex Hermann > > Yes, i've assigned a value in the script, just to try I've assigned $rU and > on the log of rtpengine I can see the value of "via-branch" valorized > correctly. I've also used the 'd' parameter in rtpproxy_manage() function. > > I've also checked on the source code of rtpengine and the part regarding the > "parse & get" of via-branch value is commented...I'm using the master branch > of rtpengine. > > This is the piece of code of call_interfaces.c where the via-branch > parameter is commented: > //bencode_dictionary_get_str(input, "via-branch", &viabranch); The via-branch is currently unused in rtpengine, even though it does appear in the control messages. From-tag and to-tag are sufficient to identify a unique dialogue within a call. cheers

2 1

R: Re: RTPPROXY & BRANCH
by Marino Mileti 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

Because I've more than 1 client behind NAT (1,2,3 mobile phones) and I would like to reach all of them in parallel mode. I can't use for all of them same ports because all mobile clients have early media (the receive video media before they answer) So at the moment this scenario is not possible? Is there any possible turnaround? ----Messaggio originale---- Da: rfuchs(a)sipwise.com Data: 24-set-2014 1.15 A: <sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org> Ogg: Re: [SR-Users] RTPPROXY &amp; BRANCH On 23/09/14 04:35 AM, marino.mileti(a)alice.it wrote: > I've a problem with rtpproxy during a parallel ring scenario. > I've two client behind NAT (192.168.10.20 & 192.168.10.50) and when I > try to call them in parallel mode (ringall) rtpproxy module sends in to > the INVITE the same RTP ports. > > Is it possible to manage rtpproxy in order to generate a couple of new > port for each branch? Not at the moment. The logic is that one endpoint advertised by the client is mapped to one endpoint advertised by rtpengine. Why would you like a separate set of ports? cheers _______________________________________________ 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

3 3

rtpproxy_offer and fix_nated_sdp in one route
by Sebastian Damm 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

Hi, I switched from rtpproxy module to the rtpproxy-ng module lately, and noticed a strange behavior. In my branch route to the device, I have two statements: fix_nated_sdp("1"); rtpproxy_offer(); The first command appends a line with "direction:active" to the SDP. The second one puts the RTP proxy in the stream. This worked all well with the old rtpproxy module. But with the new rtpproxy-ng module, I get an empty line after the SDP body, just before the "direction:active" line in the SDP, which makes the packet invalid. I tried changing the order of both statements, but without any difference. What I saw is, that the old module just sent some basic parameters to the rtpproxy and got only IP and port back. The new module sends the complete SDP to the rtpengine and gets back the "fixed" SDP. Has anyone ever seen this? Is there a way to fix it? Best Regards, Sebastian

3 4

event_route[core:receive-parse-error] is not executed 4.1.6
by Julia Boudniatsky 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

Hello, I try to use an event_route[core:receive-parse-error] { xlog("L_WARN", "Event-parse-error: $rm from $avp(inc_carrier)/n$mb/n"); } corelog=1 debug=0 kamailio 4.1.6 from source Wrong header "From" is simulated by SIPP. In log I receive only ERROR:<core> [parser/parse_from.c:79]: parse_from_header() ...... Thank you, Julia

1 0

Kamailio with Jitsi - Presence trouble
by Gaurav Kumar 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

Hello all!I am trying to setup a secure videoconferencing setup for my small office. After a lot of convincing, my bosses have allowed me to create a setup and have given me a live IP. I have used it on a Ubuntu 12.04 setup and want to setup a SIP server for very few users (less than 10, at most) to use it through Jitsi. I am trying to follow the tutorials available at:http://kb.asipto.com/kamailio:skypelikeserviceinlessthanonehour&https://… am able to log into Jitsi on independent machines, both behind and without a firewall. But the trouble I am facing is that the users do not appear online to each other. If I try to send a text message nonetheless, I get the "403 Not allowed" error.At first, I tried the config file for Kamailio provided on the first link. It had some problems due to it being an old version and the config file on the 2nd link helped me out. I suspect there is some problem with the PRESENCE module but I do not know what since it does not give any error whatsoever. I added the "#!define WITHPRESENCE" line and installed the Presence module but to no avail. My current kamailio.cfg file can be seen at: http://pastebin.com/bZJxVLfL(I have hidden my live IP in the text).My current /etc/kamailio/kamctlrc file can be seen at: http://pastebin.com/tV7Z9E8eI can upload the logs/other file content as needed. I am a n00b for Kamailio so you will have to be patient with me.Please help me out here. I have been after it for almost a week now. Cheers!GauravDear srusers! Get Yourself a cool, short @in.com Email ID now!

1 0

event_route[core:receive-parse-error] is not executed 4.1.6
by Julia Boudniatsky 29 Sep '14

29 Sep '14

Hello, I try to use an event_route[core:receive-parse-error] { xlog("L_WARN", "Parse-error: $rm from $avp(inc_carrier)/n$mb/n"); }

1 0

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