sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

42 participants
37519 discussions

Planning to release v4.2.6
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 30 Jul '15

30 Jul '15

Hello, I am planning to release v4.2.6 later this week, most likely on Thursday, July 30. If there is anything not reported that should be considered for this minor release of the branch 4.2, write to sr-dev mailing list. Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Book: SIP Routing With Kamailio - http://www.asipto.com

1 1

Carrierroute and dispatcher
by Nelson Migliaro 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

Hello everybody, I am currently using Kamailio in order to separate traffic based on dialed number. Some traffic goes to several Asterisk in a load balance strategy and other traffic goes to other SIP devices. I use carrierroute module in order to route traffic based on destination. I use scan_prefix to classify traffic and rewrite_host to route the traffic. A destination number usually go to one of 4 asterisk server. I do this in order to load balance the traffic. In order to distribute traffic I use prob (0.25 for each destination). Using this configuration, I have to include on carrieroute table a row for each destination node. Since the amount of destination is huge, I have to repeat configuration in tables. It also complicates maintenance. I was thinking of using a combination of carrierroute and dispatcher module. Carrierroute for classify traffic, strip numbers, and rewrite destination host and dispatcher to distribute the traffic over asterisk. Using this configuration I have to indicate asterisk nodes once in dispatcher table once. Also in carrierroute table I have to indicate each prefix once. I was thinking in something like this. if(!cr_route("carrier", "domain", "$rU", "$rU", "call_id")){ sl_send_reply("403", "Not allowed"); drop; } if(!ds_select_dst("1", "4")) { sl_send_reply("403", "Not allowed"); drop; } t_relay; Does it make sense, or am I complicating everything and there is a magic way to achieve this. Thank you.

2 1

Re: [SR-Users] Memory Issue while accessing $rb
by Daniel-Constantin Mierla 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

Hello, you have to increase the private memory -- see -M command line parameter -- as well as pv_buffer_size core parameter -- see core cookbook in the wiki. Cheers, Daniel On 29/07/15 13:37, prakash wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I am getting this Error: > > > > *ERROR: <core> [rvalue.c:1706]: rval_str_add2(): rv eval out of memory* > > *ERROR: <core> [lvalue.c:389]: lval_assign(): rval expression > evaluation failed (881,17-881,29)* > > > > When I tried access *$rb* when sending large amount of data(*nearly > 4MB*) as a XML body. > > How can I sort out this issue? Is there anything to be configured > properly? > > > > NOTE: > > Version that I’m using kamailio 4.1.5 > > > > Thanks and Regards, > > Prakash P > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Book: SIP Routing With Kamailio - http://www.asipto.com

1 0

Kamailio no audio
by goReeves Admin 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

Hi - I just installed Kamailio 4.3.0 on Ubuntu 14.04.2. I can connect using jitsi on windows and csipcimple on the android and do text messaging. However, when I try to do audio callis it seems that the mic is working but the audio out is not functioning. I used the tutorial to do the install so everything in the config files is pretty vanilla except for the database name, use and password. I also installed siremis and added my sip.xxxxx.com as a gateway. On the Ubuntu image I use VPN to a dedicated IP address on which all ports are open. I run web and cloud servers on this machine as well and they all work just fine. I am pretty new to this SIP stuff so it is probably my issue. Here is the network configuration: root@xxxxxxxx-VM:/var/www/siremis-4.2.0# ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx inet addr:192.168.x.x Bcast:192.168.x.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::20c:29ff:fe84:447a/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1579455 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1444329 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:346579445 (346.5 MB) TX bytes:625010061 (625.0 MB) lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:65536 Metric:1 RX packets:98232 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:98232 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:262176392 (262.1 MB) TX bytes:262176392 (262.1 MB) ppp0 Link encap:Point-to-Point Protocol inet addr:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx P-t-P:xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx Mask:255.255.255.255 UP POINTOPOINT RUNNING NOARP MULTICAST MTU:1400 Metric:1 RX packets:1105547 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1228003 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:3 RX bytes:184558026 (184.5 MB) TX bytes:235399612 (235.3 MB) -- Web Administrator <mail:webadmin@goreeves.net> goreeves <https://www.goreeves.net>

2 2

Memory Issue while accessing $rb
by prakash 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

Hello, I am getting this Error: ERROR: <core> [rvalue.c:1706]: rval_str_add2(): rv eval out of memory ERROR: <core> [lvalue.c:389]: lval_assign(): rval expression evaluation failed (881,17-881,29) When I tried access $rb when sending large amount of data(nearly 4MB) as a XML body. How can I sort out this issue? Is there anything to be configured properly? NOTE: Version that I'm using kamailio 4.1.5 Thanks and Regards, Prakash P

1 0

double rr and $fs
by Asgaroth 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

Hi All, I have kamailio setup and listening on logical interfaces (for failover purposes) and therefore need to force the sending socket on initial messages. We are testing sips+tls at the moment and what we are trying to achive is that the TLS connection occurs from the UAC to the edge proxy (also responsible for the domain) and then force UDP for internal communications to services. What I am comming up against is that when I force the sending socket on the internal interface to UDP, the record route header still shows up as a "sips" request. Then, at the presense server, when generating the NOTIFY it attempts to send it to the proxy using TLS. My understanding was that the record route would set the uri something like "sip:internal_ip" when forcing the sending socket to be "udp:internal_ip". Is my understanding correct, or am I doing something wrong here? An example subscribe message follows, the top most record-route header, from my understanding, should read sip:internal_ip, not sips:internal_ip. Is this the expected behaviour of double rr with these types of messages? How could I ensure that the top most record-route would always be a sip uri (never sips). SUBSCRIBE sips:subscriber@domain.com:5061 SIP/2.0. Record-Route: <sips:proxy_internal_ip;r2=on;lr;ftag=594055226>. Record-Route: <sips:proxy_external_ip:5061;transport=tls;r2=on;lr;ftag=594055226>. Max-Breadth: 60. Via: SIP/2.0/UDP proxy_internal_ip;branch=z9hG4bK6c9.d7dc4801e872ce9fb5730f9e09f1889e.0;i=1. Via: SIP/2.0/TLS 172.16.0.121:5060;rport=33273;received=78.143.152.30;branch=z9hG4bK708ea7ba. Max-Forwards: 69. Call-ID: 17212ff4-4421321c8feafd63bf800080f0808080@KX-HDV230X. From: <sips:subscriber@domain.com>;tag=594055226. To: <sips:subscriber@domain.com>. CSeq: 2 SUBSCRIBE. Allow: INVITE,ACK,CANCEL,BYE,PRACK,INFO,UPDATE,OPTIONS,MESSAGE,NOTIFY,REFER. Accept: application/dialog-info+xml,application/rlmi+xml,multipart/related. Contact: <sips:subscriber@172.16.0.121:5060;alias=78.143.152.30~33273~3>. Expires: 3600. Event: dialog. Any thoughts, tips, tricks would be greatly appreciated. Cheers

2 2

Kamailio - Missing INVITEs
by Ali Taher 28 Jul '15

28 Jul '15

Hello, I connected Kamailio to a postgresql database (through sqlops module) and fetching result from a table containing around 300K records , where time processing of the single query is taking around 12 ms. I noticed that on huge load (around 200 - 300 calls per second) Kamailio is not processing all INVITE packets. For instance , I initialized a counter in Kamailio that increments on every INVITE , and on the other hand I counted the number of INVITEs found in Wireshark. I got a big difference (from 30K INVITES in Kamailio , I got 15K in Kamailio), though no errors were raised in kamailio log. How can I proceed in order to detect the problem? :( Any help would be appreciated. Regards, Ali

2 1

RR module - Fail detecting strict routing
by Antonio Reale 28 Jul '15

28 Jul '15

Hi all, I have the following scenario: U1 (caller) ---> P1 (192.168.0.245, kamailio 4.3, loose-router) ----> P2 ----> (192.168.0.101, strict router) ----> .... ----> U2 (called) When U2 answers the call, at P1 arrives the 200 OK with: Record-Route: <sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-28d2e> Record-Route: <sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on> The problem is that the ACK from U1 is forwarded from kamailio to P2, as if P2 is a loose router. P2 drops the ACK message. From kamailio logs I see: Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:88]: is_preloaded(): is_preloaded: No Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:783]: after_loose(): Topmost route URI: 'sip:192.168.0.245;lr=on' is me Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:869]: after_loose(): URI to be processed: 'sip:0000000011@192.168.0.101;transport=udp;pgw-call=call-289ce' Jul 14 10:07:44 P1 /usr/sbin/kamailio[15908]: DEBUG: rr [loose.c:878]: after_loose(): Next URI is a loose router Why after_loose function considers the next URI a loose router? The Route HF in the ACK with the URI of the next hop does not contain ;lr . It seems that the function is_strict fails detecting the strict router. Thanks. Regards. Antonio

2 7

CNXCC lock
by Kelvin Chua 28 Jul '15

28 Jul '15

after a call exhausted credits, the next call will fail with a timeout. found out it gets stuck in cnxcc_mod.c line 1137 static call_t *__alloc_new_call_by_money(credit_data_t *credit_data, struct sip_msg *msg, double credit, double cost_per_second, int initial_pulse, int final_pulse) { call_t *call = NULL; lock_get(&credit_data->lock); ... the next lines will never be executed Kelvin Chua

2 2

SIPCapture and Message Queues
by Grant Bagdasarian 27 Jul '15

27 Jul '15

Hello, Would it be possible to send the messages captured by the sipcapture module to a message queue instead of inserted directly into a database? Be it DMQ or SQL Server Service Broker Queues, etc. Or maybe another approach, executing a stored procedure instead of an insert statement? I couldn't find a way to accomplish this, but maybe someone has a brilliant idea how to accomplish any of the above. Regards, Grant

2 2

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