sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

37388 discussions

Issue with Authenticating outbound Call
by Victor ku 22 Feb '22

22 Feb '22

Hi, I'm new to sip and kamailio, I have recently setup a docker container based on kamailio/kamailio:5.5.0-stretch to check things out. While I was trying to authenticate an outbound call to a 3rd party sip provider from my kamailio container, I noticed there are times that the 2nd invite with the authorization header that's supposed to be sent from the failure route doesn't get sent out. There's no error recorded in the log nor does wireshark picking up any reply to sip phone or message to 3rd party sip provider. Anyone know what might have caused this? Some other things to note: Kamailio does sent out the INVITE with authorization header and authenticated successfully when my sip phone sent the sip request with FROM ip set to the 3rd party sip server's ip. When I change the sip phone to send INVITE with FROM Domain using kamailio container's ip, I'm able to see header is being built from the trace but no INVITE with authorization header is being sent. Changing the FROM uri using $fu or uac_replace_from() does help either. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: {1 11126 INVITE > 6cda7ecf9aed4154bfb409224b84a876} uac [auth_hdr.c:408]: > build_authorization_hdr(): hdr is <Authorization: Digest > username="xxxxxxxx", realm="xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx", nonce="07f4a5779568", > uri="sip:+0123456789@xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx", qop=auth, nc=00000001, > cnonce="3782993246", response="d5ebd0ef00d44db2292c7b8508fa23bc", > algorithm=MD5 > ... > ... > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) exec: {1 11126 INVITE > 6cda7ecf9aed4154bfb409224b84a876} *** cfgtrace:dbg_cfg_trace(): > failure_route=[MANAGE_FAILURE] c=[/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=1026 a=16 > n=if > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) exec: {1 11126 INVITE > 6cda7ecf9aed4154bfb409224b84a876} *** cfgtrace:dbg_cfg_trace(): > failure_route=[MANAGE_FAILURE] c=[/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=1021 a=24 > n=t_relay > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: {1 11126 INVITE > 6cda7ecf9aed4154bfb409224b84a876} <core> [core/msg_translator.c:1797]: > check_boundaries(): no multi-part body > ... > ... > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) exec: {1 11126 INVITE > 6cda7ecf9aed4154bfb409224b84a876} *** cfgtrace:dbg_cfg_trace(): > failure_route=[MANAGE_FAILURE] c=[/etc/kamailio/kamailio.cfg] l=1030 a=2 > n=exit > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: {1 11126 INVITE > 6cda7ecf9aed4154bfb409224b84a876} dialog [dlg_var.c:97]: > cb_dlg_locals_reset(): resetting the local dialog shortcuts on script > callback: 2147483650 > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:1564]: > t_should_relay_response(): rps discarded - uas status: 100 > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: tm [t_reply.c:1924]: relay_reply(): > reply status=2 branch=0, save=0, relay=-1 icode=0 msg status=401 > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/receive.c:596]: > receive_msg(): reply-route executed in: 1753 usec > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: dialog [dlg_var.c:97]: > cb_dlg_locals_reset(): resetting the local dialog shortcuts on script > callback: 2147483652 > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/usr_avp.c:637]: > destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/usr_avp.c:637]: > destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/usr_avp.c:637]: > destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/usr_avp.c:637]: > destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/usr_avp.c:637]: > destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/usr_avp.c:637]: > destroy_avp_list(): destroying list (nil) > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/xavp.c:541]: > xavp_destroy_list(): destroying xavp list (nil) > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/xavp.c:541]: > xavp_destroy_list(): destroying xavp list (nil) > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/xavp.c:541]: > xavp_destroy_list(): destroying xavp list (nil) > kamailio-kamailio-1 | 14(22) DEBUG: <core> [core/receive.c:606]: > receive_msg(): cleaning up ---------------------------------------------- package capture ---------------------------- 192.168.0.165 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx SIP/SDP 1383 Request: INVITE > sip:+0123456789@ xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx | > xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx 192.168.0.165 SIP 585 Status: 100 Trying | > xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx 192.168.0.165 SIP 820 Status: 401 Unauthorized | > 192.168.0.165 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx SIP 396 Request: ACK sip:+0123456789 > @ xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx | ------------------------------------------nothing more till sip phone cancel ----------------- # ----------------- below is failure route config --------------------- > failure_route[MANAGE_FAILURE] { > xlog("~~~~~ MANAGE_FAILURE ($rm) ($rs-$rr) (from $fu) (to $tu) (req :$ru) > (dest $du)\r\n"); if (t_is_canceled()) { exit; } xlog("Checking status code\r\n"); #!ifdef WITH_UAC if(t_check_status("401|407")) { if (isflagset(7)) { t_reply("503","Authentication failed"); exit; } $avp(auser) = "xxxxxxxxxx"; $avp(apass) = "xxxxxxxxxx; if(uac_auth()) { setflag(7); xlog("after uac_auth $rm (from $fu)(to $tu)(req $ru)(dest $du)\r\n"); if(!t_relay()) { xlog("Failed to relay ($rm) ($rs-$rr) (from $fu)(to $tu)(req $ru)\r\n"); t_reply("500","Error"); } } else { xlog("uac_auth() not available\r\n"); t_reply("503","Authentication invalid"); } exit; } #!endif } > # ----------- end failure route config --------------------

2 2

reinvite with 2 video lines in SDP
by Filippo Graziola 22 Feb '22

22 Feb '22

Hi all, I'm facing a strange behaviour from a client (iOS application based on pjsip library) which is doing as follow when receiving a call (on phone locked): - accept the call rejecting video (m=video 0...) in SDP - reinvite to negotiate again video media Specifically the reinvite passing through kamailio (+rtpengine) has this SDP body after rtpengine offer (the client use TLS so I can't see the original message): v=0 o=- 3854443139 3854443142 IN IP4 PUBLIC_RTP_ENGINE_IP s=pjmedia b=AS:386 t=0 0 a=X-nat:0 m=audio 46734 RTP/AVP 8 101 c=IN IP4 PUBLIC_RTP_ENGINE_IP b=TIAS:96000 a=ssrc:1456418416 cname:441b90ac6db72f22 a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000 a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000 a=fmtp:101 0-16 a=sendrecv a=rtcp:46735 m=video 0 RTP/AVP 96 c=IN IP4 PUBLIC_RTP_ENGINE_IP b=TIAS:256000 m=video 46776 RTP/AVP 98 c=IN IP4 PUBLIC_RTP_ENGINE_IP b=TIAS:256000 a=rtpmap:98 H264/90000 a=fmtp:98 profile-level-id=42e01e; packetization-mode=1 a=sendrecv a=rtcp:46777 from this I can understand that the client is doing something strange, because there is still the rejection line (I know that this question should go to the pjsip guys) but I would also like to know if it is possible to "clean" this sdp by kamailio. A few clients receiving this sdp are answering with only audio. Reading the docs, sdpops/textops modules allow modifying lines by prefix or media, but till now I have no luck to exclude only the line "m=video 0 RTP/AVP 96" and his attributes without touching the correct video request. Could someone please give me some hints on it?

2 2

Enable switch redirect to other SIP server source
by bayu p 21 Feb '22

21 Feb '22

Dear Kamailio Expert, Could you help me switching redirect sip server to another sip server ? As described below architecure. I have some uac_redirect module to implement , but kamailio cannot perform running states. Pleas help to reditect sip server to another sip server. Thanks & Best regards,

2 1

kamailio success story
by Valentin Christoph 21 Feb '22

21 Feb '22

Hi all, We had to connect to an SBC, which was not compliant to RFC 3261. It was urgent, because management was waiting for first call. Within minutes, I could implement a workaround in kamailio routing configuration: ## CV experimental 2022-02-17: fake Supported HF if (is_present_hf("Require") && !is_present_hf("Supported")) { append_hf("Supported: $hdr(Require)\r\n", "Require"); msg_apply_changes(); } Thank you, kamailio! All the best Christoph

2 1

SIP server port service cannot be changed from default value (5060)
by bayu p 18 Feb '22

18 Feb '22

Hello Experts, Please help me to change port service from default 5060 port into other port due to security reason. Since I have change port in kamailio.cfg file, but services cannot fly normally that shown client unable login online (status not online). [image: image] <https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/76675592/154027407-24ab423b-302b-…> Besides, I need to run the kamailio services after install default kamailio, I have not found where procedure found in this installation process on github.com/kamailio. Could you please share if there another steps of compiling Kamailio source, install, deploy process, and running command for this specific installation process? Thanks Gb

4 9

Kamailio v5.5.4 Released
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 17 Feb '22

17 Feb '22

Hello, Kamailio SIP Server v5.5.4 stable release is out. This is a maintenance release of the latest stable branch, 5.5, that includes fixes since the release of v5.5.3. There is no change to database schema or configuration language structure that you have to do on previous installations of v5.5.x. Deployments running previous v5.5.x versions are strongly recommended to be upgraded to v5.5.4. For more details about version 5.5.4 (including links and guidelines to download the tarball or from GIT repository), visit: * https://www.kamailio.org/w/2022/02/kamailio-v5-5-4-released/ RPM, Debian/Ubuntu packages will be available soon as well. Many thanks to all contributing and using Kamailio! Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

2 2

Releasing Kamailio v5.5.4
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 17 Feb '22

17 Feb '22

Hello, I am considering to release Kamailio v5.5.4 later this week, likely on Thursday, Feb 17, 2022. This is the usual heads up notification to see if anyone is aware of issues not yet reported to bug tracker and if yes, do it as soon as possible to give them a chance to be fixed. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla -- www.asipto.com www.twitter.com/miconda -- www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Advanced Training - Online Feb 21-24, 2022 (America Timezone) * https://www.asipto.com/sw/kamailio-advanced-training-online/

1 1

Info: sipexer v1.0.0 - sip cli tool
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 16 Feb '22

16 Feb '22

Hello, I want to announce the availability of sipexer v1.0.0 - a sip cli tool that can facilitate testing and monitoring of SIP signalling systems. It tries to have a modern approach, with a flexible templating system, supporting both IPv4 and IPv6 with all the common transport layers, respectively UDP, TCP, TLS and WebSocket (for WebRTC). The project can be found at: * https://github.com/miconda/sipexer It is written in Go language for better portability, binaries for Linux, MacOS and Windows are made available for download in the release page: * https://github.com/miconda/sipexer/releases/tag/v1.0.0 Among its features: * send OPTIONS request (quick SIP ping to check if server is alive) * do registration and un-registration with customized expires value and contact URI * authentication with plain or HA1 passwords * set custom SIP headers * template system for building SIP requests * fields in the templates can be set via command line parameters or a JSON file * variables for setting field values (e.g., random number, data, time, environment variables, uuid, random string, …) * simulate SIP calls at signalling layer (INVITE-wait-BYE) * respond to requests coming during SIP calls (e.g., OPTIONS keepalives) * send instant messages with SIP MESSAGE requests * color output mode for easier troubleshooting * support for many transport layers: IPv4 and IPv6, UDP, TCP, TLS and WebSocket (for WebRTC) * send SIP requests of any type (e.g., INFO, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY, …) One usage example that could ease the testing of Kamailio is initiating registrations or simulating calls over WebSocket without the need of having a JavaScript soft phone application running in a web browser. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://www.asipto.com

10 12

allow_source_address_group in failure route
by Marrold 16 Feb '22

16 Feb '22

Hello, I'm using Kamailio as a proxy between several voice gateways and if the call fails for whatever reason (far end is busy etc) I am forwarding to an Asterisk box to play an announcement. Within the failure route I am using allow_source_address_group() to ascertain if the failure response was from a Voice Gateway or Asterisk itself, however it appears to return the group for the first branch when the reply is from the second branch to Asterisk. To handle the failure I am adding some headers, and setting a new destination indirectly with ds_select_dst before t_relay. I am using 5.5.3 on Debian 11, using KEMI / Python. Does anyone have any ideas? Thanks Matthew

2 1

Missing contact in 180 ringing causes wrong routing
by Xuo Guoto 15 Feb '22

15 Feb '22

Hello all, I have a kamailio ( kamailio 5.5.3 (x86_64/linux)) with asterisk (Asterisk 16.2.1~dfsg-2ubuntu1) with following architecture ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────┐ ┌─────────────────────┐ │ Asterisk ├───────┤ Kamailio │ 188.xxx.59.171 ───────── 103.xxx.xx.134 │ Linphone │ └─────────────┘ └─────────────┘ └─────────────────────┘ 10.10.1.13 10.10.1.9 In case the diagram is not displayed correctly its pasted at https://pastebin.com/b0UtE4Lj Registrations are handled by Kamailio and calls from linphone are routed to Asterisk. Similarly all calls originating in asterisk are routed over to Kamailio which in turn looks up AOR and routes the calls over to Linphone. Along with Linphone I also have a WebRTC endpoint at Kamailio. When calls are sent to WebRTC from asterisk, it gets correctly routed over to Asterisk, but if the client is Linphone the ACK of 200OK is not routed correctly to Linphone. I get this error in the logs: [core/forward.c:229]: get_send_socket2(): protocol/port mismatch (forced tls:188.xxx.59.171:5061, to udp:188.xxx.59.171:5060) Digging into the difference between WebRTC and Linphone, I could see that in 1800 Ringing packet from WebRTC has a Contact headers while its missing in the packet from Linphone This is the 180 ringing from WebRTC: tag: rcv pid: 695615 process: 17 time: 1644860126.209155 date: Mon Feb 14 23:05:26 2022 proto: wss ipv4 srcip: 103.xxx.xx.134 srcport: 52508 dstip: 188.xxx.59.171 dstport: 443 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SIP/2.0 180 Ringing Via: SIP/2.0/WSS 188.xxx.59.171:443;branch=z9hG4bK730a.2cc7461b72f0c895e7cce5a0cedce4f7.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.13:7000;received=10.10.1.13;rport=7000;branch=z9hG4bKPje4d8c7fc-3ecd-421c-b4bd-698097abb4c7 From: "Anonymous" <sip:anonymous@erx-staging-q01.mydomain.com>;tag=5589ec6e-8c68-44de-b03c-72751d9b9fa4 To: <sip:user_jbjd@10.10.1.9>;tag=611ql89jnj Call-ID: 895f3d45-5479-4603-9d38-6429ff77b06d CSeq: 16925 INVITE Contact: <sip:user_jbjd@erx-staging-q01.mydomain.com;gr=urn:uuid:a8b474b8-1e18-43cb-ab17-f6bbe02c548d> Supported: gruu, outbound User-Agent: SIP.js/0.7.8 Record-Route: <sip:188.xxx.59.171:443;transport=ws;r2=on;lr=on;did=ad6.8121> Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.9;r2=on;lr=on;did=ad6.8121> Content-Length: 0 While this is from Linphone tag: rcv pid: 695614 process: 16 time: 1644860097.970935 date: Mon Feb 14 23:04:57 2022 proto: tls ipv4 srcip: 103.xxx.xx.134 srcport: 25843 dstip: 188.xxx.59.171 dstport: 5061 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SIP/2.0 180 Ringing Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 188.xxx.59.171:5061;branch=z9hG4bKb5b1.d3231367383d07b1063098dcb35cc2b0.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.13:7000;received=10.10.1.13;rport=7000;branch=z9hG4bKPjd16f1379-1be7-448e-894a-c42d96f63146 From: "Anonymous" <sip:anonymous@erx-staging-q01.mydomain.com>;tag=cf7a7770-529d-4450-8bed-880382dce1dd To: <sip:user_jbjp@10.10.1.9>;tag=2ooYDia Call-ID: 8a025999-b096-4fe0-a623-9f6e6a69b8ae CSeq: 27838 INVITE User-Agent: Linphone Desktop/4.3.2 (Ubuntu 20.04.3 LTS, Qt 5.12.12) LinphoneCore/5.0.49 Supported: replaces, outbound, gruu Record-route: <sip:188.xxx.59.171:5061;transport=tls;r2=on;lr=on;did=3b9.b1b2> Record-route: <sip:10.10.1.9;r2=on;lr=on;did=3b9.b1b2> Content-Length: 0 When the 180 ringing is passed on to the Astrerisk it has the contact header modified with alias. tag: snd pid: 695615 process: 17 time: 1644860126.210189 date: Mon Feb 14 23:05:26 2022 proto: udp ipv4 srcip: 10.10.1.9 srcport: 5060 dstip: 10.10.1.13 dstport: 7000 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SIP/2.0 180 Ringing Record-Route: <sip:188.xxx.59.171:443;transport=ws;r2=on;lr=on;did=ad6.8121> Record-Route: <sip:10.10.1.9;r2=on;lr=on;did=ad6.8121> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.10.1.13:7000;received=10.10.1.13;rport=7000;branch=z9hG4bKPje4d8c7fc-3ecd-421c-b4bd-698097abb4c7 To: <sip:user_jbjd@10.10.1.9>;tag=611ql89jnj From: "Anonymous" <sip:anonymous@erx-staging-q01.mydomain.com>;tag=5589ec6e-8c68-44de-b03c-72751d9b9fa4 Call-ID: 895f3d45-5479-4603-9d38-6429ff77b06d CSeq: 16925 INVITE Contact: <sip:user_jbjd@erx-staging-q01.mydomain.com;alias=103.xxx.xx.134~52508~6;gr=urn:uuid:a8b474b8-1e18-43cb-ab17-f6bbe02c548d> Supported: gruu, outbound User-Agent: SIP.js/0.7.8 Content-Length: 0 Now, I am not sure if this is the reason for routing the packets to wrong destination, but this is all I could figure out. Any clue to get this resolved will be much appreciated. My Kamailio config is pasted at https://pastebin.com/qyRS0usw with regards, X. Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

1 0

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