sr-users

sr-users@lists.kamailio.org

42 participants
37519 discussions

apache 2.4 wstunnel
by Juha Heinanen 10 Apr '15

10 Apr '15

apache 2.4 has capability to tunnel websocket requests: https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/mod_proxy_wstunnel.html the tunnel also automatically upgrades the connection to websocket connection meaning that ws_handle_handshake() is not needed. has anyone managed to configure kamailio to handle sip requests via apache wstunnel? -- juha

4 9

Cannot register Aastra 6757i
by David Matichuk 10 Apr '15

10 Apr '15

I set up a new account and I am unable to register my phone. It shows "no Service" I'm using an Aastra 6757i. David

1 0

DTLS not working with kamailio
by renuka ghate 09 Apr '15

09 Apr '15

I have configured the kamailio server for TLS.. but my soft phone supports only DTLS, how do i configure kamailio to support DTLS. regards, Renuka

4 3

Re: [SR-Users] Avoiding "script writer didn't release transaction" warnings
by Mickael Marrache 09 Apr '15

09 Apr '15

I think understand in which case it happens. When I receive a REGISTER, I create a transaction since I need to use the t_continue feature to wake up a suspended transaction. However, the save() command of the REGISTRAR module doesn't seem to call t_reply for replying the 200 (it looks like the SL module is used instead). Therefore, I get the warning every time it happens since the transaction is not released explicitly. Should I call t_release just before exiting the block handling the REGISTER? From: Mickael Marrache [mailto:mickaelmarrache@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 1:43 PM To: sr-users(a)lists.sip-router.org Subject: Avoiding "script writer didn't release transaction" warnings Hi, In my logs, I get a lot of the following warnings: WARNING: tm [t_lookup.c:1476]: t_unref(): WARNING: script writer didn't release transaction I force transaction creation from my script to absorb retransmissions as soon as possible. I understand that I need to explicitly call t_release in order to avoid this warning. What is the most appropriate place in the script to call t_release? Thanks, Mickael

1 0

Avoiding "script writer didn't release transaction" warnings
by Mickael Marrache 09 Apr '15

09 Apr '15

Hi, In my logs, I get a lot of the following warnings: WARNING: tm [t_lookup.c:1476]: t_unref(): WARNING: script writer didn't release transaction I force transaction creation from my script to absorb retransmissions as soon as possible. I understand that I need to explicitly call t_release in order to avoid this warning. What is the most appropriate place in the script to call t_release? Thanks, Mickael

1 0

Work with radius
by Никитенко Виталий 09 Apr '15

09 Apr '15

Hi. I have scheme: User -> Kamailio -> Asterisk -> PSTN | V Radius Server At the beginning dialog (INVITE) kamailio send to radius server START packet which indicates Called, Calling, Accounting Session ID, connect_time, setup_time. When the terminating call (BYE) kamailio forms STOP package. How can I get on kamailio Called, Calling, connect_time that I have in kamailio for START packet if I only match Accounting Session ID? Thank.

3 2

missing BYE when 2 redundant kamailio servers share the same database
by Ding Ma 08 Apr '15

08 Apr '15

Hi, all I'm trying to set up 2 kamailio servers for active-active redundancy. The two kamailio severs share the the same database with db_mode=3, and no registration replication. Use pjsua2 as SIP client for testing. The test setup is as follows: kamailio server 1(k1): 10.0.1.30:5061 <http://10.0.1.30:5061/> kamailio server 2(k2): 10.0.1.32:5061 <http://10.0.1.32:5061/> sip client c1: sip:16317@10.0.1.30 <mailto:sip%3A16317@10.0.1.30>, client ip: 10.0.1.254 sip client c2: sip:72316@10.0.1.30 <mailto:sip%3A72316@10.0.1.30>, client ip: 10.0.1.254 c1 is registered with k1. c2 is registered with k2. When c1 calls c2, the call flow is as follows: INVITE: c1------>k1------>k2------>c2 200 OK: c1<------k1<------k2<------c2 So far, the INVITE works. c1 and c2 can establish a call. However, when c2 hangs up and sends BYE, the BYE is forwarded all the way to k1, and then k1 gives a 500 server error. The log on k1 seems to indicate k1 was attempting to create a TLS connection to itself instead of using the existing TLS connection to c1 to forward the BYE. BYE: c1 X k1<------k2<------c2 | |------->Connection refused/500 Here is the kamailio log on k1: Mar 16 10:34:21 kamailio.sip.com <http://kamailio.sip.com/> /usr/sbin/kamailio[13396]: ERROR: <core> [tcp_main.c:2740]: tcpconn_1st_send(): connect 10.0.1.30:55999 <http://10.0.1.30:55999/> failed (RST) Connection refused Mar 16 10:34:21 kamailio.sip.com <http://kamailio.sip.com/> /usr/sbin/kamailio[13396]: ERROR: <core> [tcp_main.c:2750]: tcpconn_1st_send(): 10.0.1.30:55999 <http://10.0.1.30:55999/>: connect & send for 0x7fc96a68a1a0 failed: Connection refused (111) This is the routing logic for BYE in kamailio.cfg: if (loose_route()) { route(DLGURI); if (is_method("BYE")) { xlog("L_DBG", "=====BYE $ru from $fu $si:$sp to $du=====\n"); dlg_manage(); setflag(FLT_ACC); # do accounting ... setflag(FLT_ACCFAILED); # ... even if the transaction fails } else if ( is_method("ACK") ) { # ACK is forwarded statelessy route(NATMANAGE); } else if ( is_method("NOTIFY") ) { # Add Record-Route for in-dialog NOTIFY as per RFC 6665. record_route(); } route(RELAY); exit; } else {...... If I add location based routing for BYE from peer kamailio, then the BYE seems to be forwarded correctly: if (loose_route()) { route(DLGURI); if (is_method("BYE")) { xlog("L_DBG", "=====BYE $ru from $fu $si:$sp to $du=====\n"); dlg_manage(); setflag(FLT_ACC); # do accounting ... setflag(FLT_ACCFAILED); # ... even if the transaction fails # If BYE coming from Kamailio peer, route BYE by location $var(peerlist)=$sel(cfg_get.trusted.peers); $var(i) = 0; while($var(i)<$(var(peerlist){param.count})) { xlog("L_DBG", "=====$(var(peerlist){param.count})=====$(var(peerlist){param.valueat,$var(i)})=====\n"); if(src_ip==$(var(peerlist){param.valueat,$var(i)})) { lookup("location"); xlog("L_DBG", "=====BYE from $fu $si:$sp to $du=====\n"); break; } $var(i) = $var(i) + 1; } } else if ( is_method("ACK") ) { # ACK is forwarded statelessy route(NATMANAGE); } else if ( is_method("NOTIFY") ) { # Add Record-Route for in-dialog NOTIFY as per RFC 6665. record_route(); } route(RELAY); exit; } else {...... My first question is why k1 loose_route sends the BYE to itself instead of the client. Is this a bug? My next question is whether the above location routing for BYE from peer kamailio a good/safe approach. The SIP traces will be sent later to avoid exceeding email size limit. Thanks

3 5

rtpstat counters
by Andres 08 Apr '15

08 Apr '15

In the documentation at: http://kamailio.org/docs/modules/4.2.x/modules/rtpproxy.html I see a variable called $rtpstat which "Returns the RTP-Statistics from the RTP-Proxy. The RTP-Statistics from the RTP-Proxy are provided as a string and it does contain several packet-counters." But I cannot find out where exactly it describes the packet counters. For example the xlog entry: log("L_ALERT", "STATS-rtpproxy,$rtpstat\n"); Will yield an output like: STATS-rtpproxy,60 596 660 1256 0#012 I need to find the documentation for those counters. Any ideas? Thanks, -- Technical Support http://www.cellroute.net

1 0

Variable interpolation in xavp identifiers
by Alex Balashov 08 Apr '15

08 Apr '15

Hello, There seems to be an implementational difference in interpolation of PVs in AVP and XAVP identifiers and/or field names. The pseudovariables documentation[1] on classical AVPs says: The 'id' can be: ... pseudo variable - if value of pv is integer, id is integer, if string, id is string So, for example, this composition of variables works: $var(f) = 'donkey'; $avp($var(f) = 'eehaw'; xlog("L_INFO", "Donkey says: $avp(donkey)\n"); It correctly prints: Donkey says: eehaw Making some assumptions, I tried this, and it did not work similarly as expected: $var(f) = 'donkey'; $xavp(r=>$var(f)) = 'eehaw'; xlog("L_INFO", "Donkey says: $xavp(r=>donkey)\n"); This prints: Donkey says: <null> And a PV dump confirms that the PV value is not interpolated: Mar 31 18:26:15 localhost /usr/local/sbin/kamailio[2399]: INFO: debugger [debugger_api.c:1799]: dbg_dump_json(): {"$xavp(r)":[{"$var(f)":["eehaw"]}]} Interpolation of variables does not work for either field or stem names. Is this a design principle of XAVPs, or an oversight? Thanks, -- Alex [1] http://www.kamailio.org/wiki/cookbooks/4.2.x/pseudovariables#avp_id_-_avps -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 Atlanta, GA 30346 United States Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/

2 1

BYE not forwarded
by Grant Bagdasarian 08 Apr '15

08 Apr '15

Hello, I have the following setup: UAC (Bria) ------ Kamailio -------- Freeswitch Kamailio is used to authenticate the client using basic authentication. Upon authentication the INVITE is sent to Freeswitch for further handling. Kamailio stays in the path using record-route. At this point, the authentication and calling FS works fine. For now, FS just answers, plays a file and hangsup the call. Answering the call and playing a file works fine. When FS hangs up the call, the BYE message is sent back to Kamailio. The problem is the BYE message from FS contains a Route header which points to Kamailio again. Which causes Kamailio to send the BYE message back to itself. Kamailio then replies with a 404. The BYE is never sent to the UAC. When I remove the record_route() for INVITEs, the call works fine, but Kamailio isn't kept in the signaling path. The BYE is sent directly to the UAC. T 10.0.5.52:54822 -> 10.0.5.50:5060 [AP] BYE sip:grant@10.0.0.40:5060;transport=tcp SIP/2.0. Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.0.5.52;rport;branch=z9hG4bK99X8a4Q8BFy1a. Route: <sip:10.0.5.50;transport=tcp;lr=on>. Max-Forwards: 70. From: <sip:123456789@10.0.0.40>;tag=aey7rKe7DmQte. To: <sip:grant@10.0.0.40>;tag=dbc9c27b. Call-ID: NmQ4YjYyMDFkNmMwZjg0ZmU5NjQ3ODhjYzU0MDBmNGI. CSeq: 73909300 BYE. User-Agent: CM SBC. Allow: INVITE, ACK, BYE, CANCEL, OPTIONS, MESSAGE, INFO, UPDATE, NOTIFY. Supported: timer, path, replaces. Reason: Q.850;cause=16;text="NORMAL_CLEARING". Content-Length: 0. Here is the WITHINDLG route: route[WITHINDLG] { xlog("L_INFO", "[R-ROUTE-WITHINDLG:$ci] !>" "Route:WITHINDLG;UnixTime:$TV(un);RequestURI:$rU;RequestMethod:$rm;FromTag:$ft;ToTag:$tt;CallID:$ci;From:$fU;To:$rU\r\n"); if (!has_totag()) { return; } # Sequential request within a dialog should take the path determined by record-routing if (loose_route()) { route(RELAY); exit; } else { if (is_method("ACK")) { if (t_check_trans()) { # No Loose-Route, but stateful ACK. Must be ACK after 487 route(RELAY); exit; } else { # ACK without matching transaction exit; } } sl_send_reply("404","Not here"); } exit; } I'm using TCP as the transport. Kamailio: 4.2.3 Freeswitch: 1.5.15 I've attached a SIP trace from the point of view of Kamailio. UAC: 10.0.0.40 Kamailio: 10.0.5.50 Freeswitch: 10.0.5.52 What is going on here? The whole Record-Route thing confuses me a lot. Regards, Grant

3 5

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