17 Feb
2004
17 Feb
'04
2:28 p.m.
Hello.
I'm newbie to this list, as well as to SER. I'm testing SER with nathelper
module and rtpproxy (portaone RTP proxy), and I can't get to make it work.
The version I'm using is that from the CVS (latest), because I tried with
v.0.8.12 and didn't get satisfactory results.
rtpproxy is started this way:
rtpproxy -2f -l 192.168.20.15
My config file is the one that comes with the files, with the appropiate changes:
debug=3 # debug level (cmd line: -dddddddddd)
#fork=no
#log_stderror=no # (cmd line: -E)
/* Uncomment these lines to enter debugging mode
fork=no
log_stderror=yes
*/
check_via=no # (cmd. line: -v)
dns=no # (cmd. line: -r)
rev_dns=no # (cmd. line: -R)
port=5060
children=4
fifo="/tmp/ser_fifo"
listen=192.168.20.15
alias=mydomain.com
alias=192.168.0.15
alias=192.168.20.15
loadmodule "/usr/lib/ser/modules/sl.so"
loadmodule "/usr/lib/ser/modules/tm.so"
loadmodule "/usr/lib/ser/modules/rr.so"
loadmodule "/usr/lib/ser/modules/maxfwd.so"
loadmodule "/usr/lib/ser/modules/usrloc.so"
loadmodule "/usr/lib/ser/modules/registrar.so"
loadmodule "/usr/lib/ser/modules/textops.so"
loadmodule "/usr/lib/ser/modules/nathelper.so"
modparam("usrloc", "db_mode", 0)
modparam("rr", "enable_full_lr", 1)
modparam("registrar", "nat_flag", 6)
modparam("nathelper", "natping_interval", 30) # Ping interval 30 s
modparam("nathelper", "ping_nated_only", 1) # Ping only clients
behind NAT
route{
# initial sanity checks -- messages with
# max_forwards==0, or excessively long requests
if (!mf_process_maxfwd_header("10")) {
sl_send_reply("483","Too Many Hops");
break;
};
if (msg:len >= max_len ) {
sl_send_reply("513", "Message too big");
break;
};
# !! Nathelper
# Special handling for NATed clients; first, NAT test is
# executed: it looks for via!=received and RFC1918 addresses
# in Contact (may fail if line-folding is used); also,
# the received test should, if completed, should check all
# vias for rpesence of received
if (nat_uac_test("3")) {
# Allow RR-ed requests, as these may indicate that
# a NAT-enabled proxy takes care of it; unless it is
# a REGISTER
if (method == "REGISTER" || !
search("^Record-Route:")) {
log("LOG: Someone trying to register from private IP,
rewriting\n");
# This will work only for user agents that support symmetric
# communication. We tested quite many of them and majority is
# smart enough to be symmetric. In some phones it takes a
configuration
# option. With Cisco 7960, it is called NAT_Enable=Yes, with
kphone it is
# called "symmetric media" and "symmetric
signalling".
fix_nated_contact(); # Rewrite contact with source IP of
signalling
if (method == "INVITE") {
fix_nated_sdp("1"); # Add direction=active to SDP
};
force_rport(); # Add rport parameter to topmost Via
setflag(6); # Mark as NATed
};
};
# we record-route all messages -- to make sure that
# subsequent messages will go through our proxy; that's
# particularly good if upstream and downstream entities
# use different transport protocol
if (!method=="REGISTER") record_route();
# subsequent messages withing a dialog should take the
# path determined by record-routing
if (loose_route()) {
# mark routing logic in request
append_hf("P-hint: rr-enforced\r\n");
route(1);
break;
};
if (!uri==myself) {
# mark routing logic in request
append_hf("P-hint: outbound\r\n");
route(1);
break;
};
# if the request is for other domain use UsrLoc
# (in case, it does not work, use the following command
# with proper names and addresses in it)
if (uri==myself) {
if (method=="REGISTER") {
# Uncomment this if you want to use digest authentication
# if (!www_authorize("iptel.org", "subscriber"))
{
# www_challenge("iptel.org", "0");
# break;
# };
save("location");
break;
};
lookup("aliases");
if (!uri==myself) {
append_hf("P-hint: outbound alias\r\n");
route(1);
break;
};
# native SIP destinations are handled using our USRLOC DB
if (!lookup("location")) {
sl_send_reply("404", "Not Found");
break;
};
};
append_hf("P-hint: usrloc applied\r\n");
route(1);
}
route[1]
{
# !! Nathelper
#if (uri=~"[@:](192\.168\.|10\.|172\.(1[6-9]|2[0-9]|3[0-1])\.)"
&&
!search("^Route:")){
# sl_send_reply("479", "We don't forward to private IP
addresses");
# break;
#};
# if client or server know to be behind a NAT, enable relay
if (isflagset(6)) {
force_rtp_proxy();
};
# NAT processing of replies; apply to all transactions (for example,
# re-INVITEs from public to private UA are hard to identify as
# NATed at the moment of request processing); look at replies
t_on_reply("1");
# send it out now; use stateful forwarding as it works reliably
# even for UDP2TCP
if (!t_relay()) {
sl_reply_error();
};
}
# !! Nathelper
onreply_route[1] {
# NATed transaction ?
if (isflagset(6) && status =~ "(183)|2[0-9][0-9]") {
fix_nated_contact();
force_rtp_proxy();
# otherwise, is it a transaction behind a NAT and we did not
# know at time of request processing ? (RFC1918 contacts)
} else if (nat_uac_test("1")) {
fix_nated_contact();
};
}
These are the logs I get at /var/log/messages:
sistemas2 ser: WARNING: fix_socket_list: could not rev. resolve 192.168.20.15
sistemas2 ser: WARNING: fix_socket_list: could not rev. resolve 192.168.20.15
sistemas2 ser: Listening on
sistemas2 ser: udp: 192.168.20.15 [192.168.20.15]:5060
sistemas2 ser: tcp: 192.168.20.15 [192.168.20.15]:5060
sistemas2 ser: Aliases:
sistemas2 ser: *: 192.168.20.15:*
sistemas2 ser: *: 192.168.0.15:*
sistemas2 ser: *: mydomain.com:*
sistemas2 ser:
sistemas2 ser: Listening on
sistemas2 ser: udp: 192.168.20.15 [192.168.20.15]:5060
sistemas2 ser: tcp: 192.168.20.15 [192.168.20.15]:5060
sistemas2 ser: Aliases:
sistemas2 ser: *: 192.168.20.15:*
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25761]: ERROR: send_rtpp_command: can't read reply from
a RTP proxy
sistemas2 ser: *: 192.168.0.15:*
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25761]: WARNING: nathelper: can't get version of the RTP
proxy
sistemas2 ser: *: mydomain.com:*
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25761]: WARNING: nathelper: support for RTP proxyhas
been disabled
sistemas2 ser:
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25761]: INFO: udp_init: SO_RCVBUF is initially 65535
sistemas2 ser: Listening on
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25761]: INFO: udp_init: SO_RCVBUF is finally 131070
sistemas2 ser: udp: 192.168.20.15 [192.168.20.15]:5060
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25762]: NOTICE:init_avp_child: no avp_db_url specified
-> feature disabled
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25763]: NOTICE:init_avp_child: no avp_db_url specified
-> feature disabled
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25764]: NOTICE:init_avp_child: no avp_db_url specified
-> feature disabled
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25765]: NOTICE:init_avp_child: no avp_db_url specified
-> feature disabled
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25766]: INFO: fifo process starting: 25766
sistemas2 ser: tcp: 192.168.20.15 [192.168.20.15]:5060
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25766]: SER: open_uac_fifo: fifo server up at
/tmp/ser_fifo...
sistemas2 ser: Aliases:
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25766]: WARNING: no fifo_db_url given - fifo DB commands
disabled!
sistemas2 ser: *: 192.168.20.15:*
sistemas2 ser: *: 192.168.0.15:*
sistemas2 ser: *: mydomain.com:*
sistemas2 ser:
sistemas2 ser: ser startup succeeded
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25764]: ERROR: force_rtp_proxy2: support for RTP proxy
is disabled
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25762]: ERROR: force_rtp_proxy2: support for RTP proxy
is disabled
sistemas2 /usr/sbin/ser[25762]: ERROR: on_reply processing failed
What's wrong? I can't seem to find my mistake!
Thanks in advance.
Eduard San Anselmo