sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

26 participants
37380 discussions

Configuring package memory
by Ivan Ribakov 05 Sep '23

05 Sep '23

Is there any specific reason why shared memory can be configured via the config files ("shm_mem_size") AND CLI flags ("-m") but package memory can only be set via CLI flags ("-M")? Did no one ever came across the need to configure the package memory limit so far, or is there another way to achieve it without using the CLI flag? -- Ivan Ribakov Software Engineer www.zaleos.net

3 2

Re: Kamailio stops processing UDP on one interface
by Ihor Olkhovskyi 31 Aug '23

31 Aug '23

Bastian, According to mine stats all seems ok... # kamctl stats shmem { "jsonrpc": "2.0", "result": [ "shmem:fragments = 330", "shmem:free_size = 1889418024", "shmem:max_used_size = 258962624", "shmem:real_used_size = 258065624", "shmem:total_size = 2147483648", "shmem:used_size = 248809096" ], "id": 212042 } pkg.stats also not showing any signs of exhausting. For me what is working is server can send packets, but not receive em back even. And it's happening only on 1 interface. Le 30/08/2023 à 21:44, Bastian Triller a écrit : > I'm asking, because we kind of observed similar behaviour after > overload. We've did some load testing and at some point SHM was > exhausted and that didn't recover itself. One process was using nearly > 100% CPU. And I guess that at least sl replies still works at that point. > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 9:28 PM Ihor Olkhovskyi > <igorolhovskiy(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Bastian, > > I'm fine with retransmissions and so, but for me it's really > interesting, that server is not restoring it's state after a while > and only restart helps. And this is happening only with UDP on one > interface, others are working fine over UDP > > Le 30/08/2023 à 17:19, Bastian Triller a écrit : >> Maybe it's not beneficial to have a receive buffer that high. If >> your presence server is stateful, it will send retransmissions if >> packets get dropped. But it will also send retransmissions if >> your proxy does not reply fast enough. So your proxy may be >> damped by retransmissions. Did you check SHM/active transactions >> on your proxy? >> >> Regards, >> Bastian >> >> On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 3:56 PM Ihor Olkhovskyi >> <igorolhovskiy(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> They are increasing, actually >> >> # ss -l -u -m src X.X.X.X/Y >> State Recv-Q Send-Q Local >> Address:Port Peer Address:Port >> UNCONN 25167616 0 X.X.X.X:sip *:* >> skmem:(r25167616,rb25165824,t0,tb65536,f2304,w0,o0,bl0,d514894) >> >> Le mer. 30 août 2023 à 15:04, Bastian Triller >> <bastian.triller(a)gmail.com> a écrit : >> >> Are drops increasing on that socket while it is happening? >> ss -l src <local_interface> -u sport 5060 -m >> >> On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 3:26 PM Ihor Olkhovskyi >> <igorolhovskiy(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Just to add some info >> >> netstat -nlp >> Active Internet connections (only servers) >> Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address >> State PID/Program name >> ... >> udp 25167616 0 <local_interface>:5060 >> 0.0.0.0:* 211759/kamailio >> ... >> >> So I see a huge Receive Queue on UDP for Kamailio >> which is not clearing. >> >> Le mar. 29 août 2023 à 14:29, Ihor Olkhovskyi >> <igorolhovskiy(a)gmail.com> a écrit : >> >> Hello, >> >> I've faced a bit strange issue, but a bit of >> preface. I have Kamailio as a proxy (TLS/WS <-> >> UDP) and second Kamailio as a presence server. At >> some point presence server accepts around 5K >> PUBLISH within 1 minute and sending around the >> same amount of NOTIFY to proxy Kamailio. >> >> Proxy is "transforming" protocol to TLS, but at >> sime point I'm starting to get these type of errors >> >> tm [../../core/forward.h:292]: msg_send_buffer(): >> tcp_send failed >> tm [t_fwd.c:1588]: t_send_branch(): sending >> request on branch 0 failed >> <script>: [RELAY] Relay to >> <sip:X.X.X.X:51571;transport=tls> failed! >> tm [../../core/forward.h:292]: msg_send_buffer(): >> tcp_send failed >> tm [t_fwd.c:1588]: t_send_branch(): sending >> request on branch 0 failed >> >> Some of those messages are 100% valid as client >> can go away or so. Some are not, cause I'm sure >> client is alive and connected. >> >> But the problem comes later. At some moment proxy >> Kamailio just stops accept UDP traffic on this >> interface (where it also accepts all NOTIFY's), >> at the start of the "stopping accepting" Kamailio >> sends OPTIONS via DISPATCHER but not able to >> receive 200 OK. >> >> Over TLS on the same interface all is ok. On >> other (loopback) interface UDP is being processed >> fine, so I don't suspert some limit on open files >> here. >> >> Only restart of Kamailio proxy process helps in >> this case. >> >> I've tuned net.core.rmem_max and >> net.core.rmem_default to 25 Mb, so in theory >> buffer should not be the case. >> >> Is there some internal "interface buffer" in >> Kamailio that is not freed upon failure send or >> maybe I've missed somethig? >> >> Kamailio 5.6.4 >> >> fork=yes >> children=12 >> tcp_children=12 >> >> enable_tls=yes >> >> tcp_accept_no_cl=yes >> tcp_max_connections=63536 >> tls_max_connections=63536 >> tcp_accept_aliases=no >> tcp_async=yes >> tcp_connect_timeout=10 >> tcp_conn_wq_max=63536 >> tcp_crlf_ping=yes >> tcp_delayed_ack=yes >> tcp_fd_cache=yes >> tcp_keepalive=yes >> tcp_keepcnt=3 >> tcp_keepidle=30 >> tcp_keepintvl=10 >> tcp_linger2=30 >> tcp_rd_buf_size=80000 >> tcp_send_timeout=10 >> tcp_wq_blk_size=2100 >> tcp_wq_max=10485760 >> open_files_limit=63536 >> >> Sysctl >> >> # To increase the amount of memory available for >> socket input/output queues >> net.ipv4.tcp_rmem = 4096 25165824 25165824 >> net.core.rmem_max = 25165824 >> net.core.rmem_default = 25165824 >> net.ipv4.tcp_wmem = 4096 65536 25165824 >> net.core.wmem_max = 25165824 >> net.core.wmem_default = 65536 >> net.core.optmem_max = 25165824 >> >> # To limit the maximum number of requests queued >> to a listen socket >> net.core.somaxconn = 128 >> >> # Tells TCP to instead make decisions that would >> prefer lower latency. >> net.ipv4.tcp_low_latency=1 >> >> # Optional (it will increase performance) >> net.core.netdev_max_backlog = 1000 >> net.ipv4.tcp_max_syn_backlog = 128 >> >> # Flush the routing table to make changes happen >> instantly. >> net.ipv4.route.flush=1 >> -- >> Best regards, >> Ihor (Igor) >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Ihor (Igor) >> __________________________________________________________ >> Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial >> Discussions >> To unsubscribe send an email to >> sr-users-leave(a)lists.kamailio.org >> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, >> do not reply only to the sender! >> Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >> >> __________________________________________________________ >> Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >> To unsubscribe send an email to >> sr-users-leave(a)lists.kamailio.org >> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do >> not reply only to the sender! >> Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Ihor (Igor) >> __________________________________________________________ >> Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >> To unsubscribe send an email to sr-users-leave(a)lists.kamailio.org >> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not >> reply only to the sender! >> Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >> >> >> __________________________________________________________ >> Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions >> To unsubscribe send an email tosr-users-leave(a)lists.kamailio.org >> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! >> Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe: >

1 0

Install Kamailio 5.3
by Daniel Oliveira Hilário 30 Aug '23

30 Aug '23

Hi people, I installed Kamailio 5.3 on Ubuntu Server 22 LTS, but I am not able to resolve several PHP errors that occur when I try to open the website http://localhost/siremis/. Which Linux distro and version is best suited for installation? Is Kamailio version 5.3 operational or is it better to use version 4.4? Att., Daniel Hilário INFRACOM/UFRGS 51 3308 4801

2 1

Kamailio stops processing UDP on one interface
by Ihor Olkhovskyi 30 Aug '23

30 Aug '23

Hello, I've faced a bit strange issue, but a bit of preface. I have Kamailio as a proxy (TLS/WS <-> UDP) and second Kamailio as a presence server. At some point presence server accepts around 5K PUBLISH within 1 minute and sending around the same amount of NOTIFY to proxy Kamailio. Proxy is "transforming" protocol to TLS, but at sime point I'm starting to get these type of errors tm [../../core/forward.h:292]: msg_send_buffer(): tcp_send failed tm [t_fwd.c:1588]: t_send_branch(): sending request on branch 0 failed <script>: [RELAY] Relay to <sip:X.X.X.X:51571;transport=tls> failed! tm [../../core/forward.h:292]: msg_send_buffer(): tcp_send failed tm [t_fwd.c:1588]: t_send_branch(): sending request on branch 0 failed Some of those messages are 100% valid as client can go away or so. Some are not, cause I'm sure client is alive and connected. But the problem comes later. At some moment proxy Kamailio just stops accept UDP traffic on this interface (where it also accepts all NOTIFY's), at the start of the "stopping accepting" Kamailio sends OPTIONS via DISPATCHER but not able to receive 200 OK. Over TLS on the same interface all is ok. On other (loopback) interface UDP is being processed fine, so I don't suspert some limit on open files here. Only restart of Kamailio proxy process helps in this case. I've tuned net.core.rmem_max and net.core.rmem_default to 25 Mb, so in theory buffer should not be the case. Is there some internal "interface buffer" in Kamailio that is not freed upon failure send or maybe I've missed somethig? Kamailio 5.6.4 fork=yes children=12 tcp_children=12 enable_tls=yes tcp_accept_no_cl=yes tcp_max_connections=63536 tls_max_connections=63536 tcp_accept_aliases=no tcp_async=yes tcp_connect_timeout=10 tcp_conn_wq_max=63536 tcp_crlf_ping=yes tcp_delayed_ack=yes tcp_fd_cache=yes tcp_keepalive=yes tcp_keepcnt=3 tcp_keepidle=30 tcp_keepintvl=10 tcp_linger2=30 tcp_rd_buf_size=80000 tcp_send_timeout=10 tcp_wq_blk_size=2100 tcp_wq_max=10485760 open_files_limit=63536 Sysctl # To increase the amount of memory available for socket input/output queues net.ipv4.tcp_rmem = 4096 25165824 25165824 net.core.rmem_max = 25165824 net.core.rmem_default = 25165824 net.ipv4.tcp_wmem = 4096 65536 25165824 net.core.wmem_max = 25165824 net.core.wmem_default = 65536 net.core.optmem_max = 25165824 # To limit the maximum number of requests queued to a listen socket net.core.somaxconn = 128 # Tells TCP to instead make decisions that would prefer lower latency. net.ipv4.tcp_low_latency=1 # Optional (it will increase performance) net.core.netdev_max_backlog = 1000 net.ipv4.tcp_max_syn_backlog = 128 # Flush the routing table to make changes happen instantly. net.ipv4.route.flush=1 -- Best regards, Ihor (Igor)

3 5

[OT] Code 868 reply to SIP OPTIONS ?
by Olivier 30 Aug '23

30 Aug '23

Hello, Have you ever seen a SIP device replying with code 868 to a SIP OPTIONS request ? Best regards

1 1

How to forward 480
by Anthony Blandin 29 Aug '23

29 Aug '23

Hello, I have a Kamailio SBC connected to another foreign SBC and to a media server. In case of non response, Kamailio SBC receives a 480 Temporarily not available from the foreign SBC and I need to forward this 480 to my media server but I don't see how to do that. The 480 arrives in the onreply_route. If I use then a failure_route, it resends the initial INVITE and not the 480. Is there a way to do that? Thanks for your help. Anthony Blandin

2 1

Re: extreme dildoes
by Angel Elena 27 Aug '23

27 Aug '23

I think is better sip over tls to extra protection xD Sent from Android device El 26 ago 2023 12:59, Julien Chavanton <jchavanton(a)gmail.com> escribió: Are you trying to connect them over SIP ? On Sat, Aug 26, 2023, 6:06 AM <feigelwang(a)uusextoy.com <mailto:feigelwang@uusextoy.com> > wrote: So, when you still are alone, buying a huge dildo is worth it. Enjoy sex with the huge realistic dildo anytime and anywhere. Not only that, the big dildo brings completely different sexual stimulation. Maybe you want to enjoy full sex, should try some other sex toys. https://www.hugedildo.com/ __________________________________________________________ Kamailio - Users Mailing List - Non Commercial Discussions To unsubscribe send an email to sr-users-leave(a)lists.kamailio.org <mailto:sr-users-leave@lists.kamailio.org> Important: keep the mailing list in the recipients, do not reply only to the sender! Edit mailing list options or unsubscribe:

1 0

extreme dildoes
by feigelwang＠uusextoy.com 27 Aug '23

27 Aug '23

So, when you still are alone, buying a huge dildo is worth it. Enjoy sex with the huge realistic dildo anytime and anywhere. Not only that, the big dildo brings completely different sexual stimulation. Maybe you want to enjoy full sex, should try some other sex toys. https://www.hugedildo.com/

6 5

large dildo
by feigelwang＠uusextoy.com 26 Aug '23

26 Aug '23

Or, if you are good at Google search, I believe you can definitely find more ways to play the big dildo. All in all, huge dildos are the best sex toy for singles. For single women, it’s vaginal masturbation. For single men, it’s anal sex. https://www.hugedildo.com/

1 0

large dildo
by feigelwang＠uusextoy.com 26 Aug '23

26 Aug '23

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